As a new poster here, I am not sure if this topic has been discussed already, and if it has forgive the duplication. Anyway this is not a tread to subjectively state which driver is better or which driver is better because if a car, essentially, this is not a flaimbait thread.
Basically if we look at different drivres we some excelling on certain tracks and not on others (Monaco/Bazil), in certain conditions and not in others (Wet/Dry). It has been well documented that a driver like JV likes to be on the edge and a driver like MS likes a car that has a nervous rear-end. So I would like us to discuss which driving styles in relation to the conditions in which they excel.
So as to set in some objectiveity and a reference framework for comparison Lets look at drivers from te=he same recent eras. In this case Schumacher, Hakkinen and Hill, all competing over the same period more or less and all of them WDC. Lets also add JV simply because he too is a WDC and has competed long enough for comparison's sake. So looking at those 4 WDC's, lets discuss things like:
1. Driving style.
2. Technical knowledge/feedback
3. Performance on the edge
4. Performance under pressure
5. Ability within the team
6. Tracks at which they should excel
etc. etc.
I look forward to your responses.
Driver Analysis
Started by
Donny
, Jul 11 2000 09:17
36 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
BuzzingHornet
-
- 6,190 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 10:22
they are/were all good at all those things, its hard to put one in front of the other. If pushed, I would say that in terms of style, Schumacher and Hill have strong styles and car set up preferences, while JV and Hakkinen are less fussed and drive what they have. This sometimes doesn't work out though
Schumacher has very fast corner entry (stand at Becketts in the wet and you'll wince) and is very confident/foolhardy ;) on the brakes. He seems to like a car that is very responsive, and doesn't mind if it steps out on him now and again. I think he's the best driver of these four because of his 'feel', which means that he can use the responsiveness of the car to sense his way round the track; thats why he's so good at Monaco as well as Spa. Under pressure he's up and down, sometimes good, sometimes he blows it... thats life. His technical feedback is supposed to be average but he's so quick that it doesn't really matter. when they need it, they get a slower guy like Badoer to chug round Mugello
Hill preferred a car that was more like the sort of thing Prost liked, mild understeer and a good balance. He was a very sensetive driver and also very quick, but his main strengths were testing and developing a car, and setting it up for any track (the only guy to start every GP of a season from the front row shows his speed and technical skill). He was prone to the occasional mistake but usually raced well, and was quick on virtually all circuits wet or dry. His performance under pressure was sometimes questionable but when on the edge he could sometimes pull out a great performance (last 2 races of 94, last race of 96, Hungary 95 97 etc.).
I personally rate these two above than Hakkinen or Villeneuve; Hakkinen because he never had to genuinely race his teammate, and Villeneuve because (although awesome in the dry) JV cannot drive in the wet.
Schumacher has very fast corner entry (stand at Becketts in the wet and you'll wince) and is very confident/foolhardy ;) on the brakes. He seems to like a car that is very responsive, and doesn't mind if it steps out on him now and again. I think he's the best driver of these four because of his 'feel', which means that he can use the responsiveness of the car to sense his way round the track; thats why he's so good at Monaco as well as Spa. Under pressure he's up and down, sometimes good, sometimes he blows it... thats life. His technical feedback is supposed to be average but he's so quick that it doesn't really matter. when they need it, they get a slower guy like Badoer to chug round Mugello
Hill preferred a car that was more like the sort of thing Prost liked, mild understeer and a good balance. He was a very sensetive driver and also very quick, but his main strengths were testing and developing a car, and setting it up for any track (the only guy to start every GP of a season from the front row shows his speed and technical skill). He was prone to the occasional mistake but usually raced well, and was quick on virtually all circuits wet or dry. His performance under pressure was sometimes questionable but when on the edge he could sometimes pull out a great performance (last 2 races of 94, last race of 96, Hungary 95 97 etc.).
I personally rate these two above than Hakkinen or Villeneuve; Hakkinen because he never had to genuinely race his teammate, and Villeneuve because (although awesome in the dry) JV cannot drive in the wet.
#3
silver
-
- 518 posts
- Joined: July 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 10:47
Hello Donny and welcome!
I try to answer quite briefly to your questions driver by driver.
MH
1. Mika setups his car to be extremely stiff and unforgiving. He tends to brake on straight line, take late entry into the corner and be really early on the throttle and aggressively acclerate out of the corner.
Mika doesnt like understeer at all but since he has the fastest reactions from all of the F1 drivers he can live with oversteer.
Mika`s driving style is very agressive and since he has unbelieveable co-ordination and reactions he makes it look very smooth.
Mika doesnt brake as late as turn-in drivers but he brakes in shorter distance.
2.Mika is good as a aerodynamical testdriver. That means that he drives about 90% from the maximum speed exactly on the same line lap after lap and if the time improves it is because of the improved car. Mika is described as a good patient when he is testing: he tells exactly what is wrong with the car on which part of the track.
3.Really good on the edge. Mika is really fast on dry and also on the wet but he is in trouble when it starts to rain since his driving style requires stable conditions in the corners. Also his very unforgiving dry weather setup makes it really difficult for him to drive if it starts raining.
4.Iceman is always at his best under pressure. In fact he performs better under pressure than without any...
5.Mika is a teamworker, not really a leader. Especially few years ago he took silently what was given to him rather than wanted more aloud.
6.Mika`s tracks where he excel:
Brazil,Barcelona,Monaco,Silverstone,Spa, and Suzuka(flowing tracks with semi-fast and fast corners). Pretty good also in Monza and Hockenheim.
MS
1.Michael doesnt necessarily have a car with a very nervous rear-end. Even if his car would be understeering his way of picking the throttle (25% on the apex) very early in the corner makes the car look very nervous indeed.
2.Michael downside in testing is that he automatically adapts his driving style to the car so he doesnt necessarily know when the time has improved that is it from the car or from him.
Michael has excellent technical knowledge. If Mika was a patient in testing Michael is like a doctor, not only does he tell what is wrong he also provides engineers with possible solutions.
3.Michael is also very good on the edge but he makes occational mistakes when driving on the edge (overdrives).
Michael is very good on alternating conditions. His setup is much more forgiving than for example Mikas and Michael excels when weather turns from dry to wet. When it is wet he is not faster anymore.
Also because setup combined with his driving style his car looks very loose.
4.Only weakness in Michael as a driver is his ability to withstand pressure. 3 times WDC has been decided on last race with Michael and he has never finished that race.
In 1994 he ran wide and hit the wall. His car was seriously damaged and if only Hill had waited one more corner he would have been WDC.
In 1997 with JV...do i have to say more?
1998 with MH...some say it was cars failure some say it was Michaels error( the start i mean). Non-finish in that race wasnt his fault even though it looked like his tyres were on the wrong end of the solid beating through the whole race.
5.MS favourite tracks:
Argentina, Monaco, Canada, Magny Cours,Hungary, Spa (tracks with really tight brakings and tight tracks where he can throttle-steer the car in the corners)
DH
1.Very smooth and technical. If the car was good he was fast but he couldnt drive around problems.
2.Hill is with Prost probably technically the best driver ever. He was excellent test driver and he was able to make the car work for him...
3.Damon didnt look like he was ever on the edge. When the car was good(he had made it very good) he was able to run very close to the edge but i wonder if he ever really drove on the edge.
4.Hill wasnt really good under pressure. Especially Michael was able to mentally offbalance Damon few times when pressure was on.
5.Hill worked well especially with the engineers. But otherwise i wonder if he ever was a teams favourite driver.
6.There were no tracks where Damon was clearly exceling. When the car was suiting he was fast everywhere.
JV
1.Fancies stiff setup. Likes to brake on straight line and as late as possible.
2.I really dont have that much knowledge on JV`s technical ability but as far as i know no one rates him to be a star on that area...correct if i am wrong.
3.Really good on the edge. In fact there is not "crazier" driver in F1 at the moment.
MH is naturally faster in really fast corners but JV makes up the difference by totally committing himself.
4.JV`s best quality is by far his head. His is really cool headed and tough customer. Like MH he is at his best when the pressure is on.
5.Again i dont have much knowledge about this area but i`ll give it a try.
JV is a leader in the team. He knows what he wants from the team and doesnt hesitate to demand it.
Doesnt like PR or other non-driving related tasks of F1.
6.Faster the better...especially in Monza and Hockenheim. But also fast in Spa.
I try to answer quite briefly to your questions driver by driver.
MH
1. Mika setups his car to be extremely stiff and unforgiving. He tends to brake on straight line, take late entry into the corner and be really early on the throttle and aggressively acclerate out of the corner.
Mika doesnt like understeer at all but since he has the fastest reactions from all of the F1 drivers he can live with oversteer.
Mika`s driving style is very agressive and since he has unbelieveable co-ordination and reactions he makes it look very smooth.
Mika doesnt brake as late as turn-in drivers but he brakes in shorter distance.
2.Mika is good as a aerodynamical testdriver. That means that he drives about 90% from the maximum speed exactly on the same line lap after lap and if the time improves it is because of the improved car. Mika is described as a good patient when he is testing: he tells exactly what is wrong with the car on which part of the track.
3.Really good on the edge. Mika is really fast on dry and also on the wet but he is in trouble when it starts to rain since his driving style requires stable conditions in the corners. Also his very unforgiving dry weather setup makes it really difficult for him to drive if it starts raining.
4.Iceman is always at his best under pressure. In fact he performs better under pressure than without any...
5.Mika is a teamworker, not really a leader. Especially few years ago he took silently what was given to him rather than wanted more aloud.
6.Mika`s tracks where he excel:
Brazil,Barcelona,Monaco,Silverstone,Spa, and Suzuka(flowing tracks with semi-fast and fast corners). Pretty good also in Monza and Hockenheim.
MS
1.Michael doesnt necessarily have a car with a very nervous rear-end. Even if his car would be understeering his way of picking the throttle (25% on the apex) very early in the corner makes the car look very nervous indeed.
2.Michael downside in testing is that he automatically adapts his driving style to the car so he doesnt necessarily know when the time has improved that is it from the car or from him.
Michael has excellent technical knowledge. If Mika was a patient in testing Michael is like a doctor, not only does he tell what is wrong he also provides engineers with possible solutions.
3.Michael is also very good on the edge but he makes occational mistakes when driving on the edge (overdrives).
Michael is very good on alternating conditions. His setup is much more forgiving than for example Mikas and Michael excels when weather turns from dry to wet. When it is wet he is not faster anymore.
Also because setup combined with his driving style his car looks very loose.
4.Only weakness in Michael as a driver is his ability to withstand pressure. 3 times WDC has been decided on last race with Michael and he has never finished that race.
In 1994 he ran wide and hit the wall. His car was seriously damaged and if only Hill had waited one more corner he would have been WDC.
In 1997 with JV...do i have to say more?
1998 with MH...some say it was cars failure some say it was Michaels error( the start i mean). Non-finish in that race wasnt his fault even though it looked like his tyres were on the wrong end of the solid beating through the whole race.
5.MS favourite tracks:
Argentina, Monaco, Canada, Magny Cours,Hungary, Spa (tracks with really tight brakings and tight tracks where he can throttle-steer the car in the corners)
DH
1.Very smooth and technical. If the car was good he was fast but he couldnt drive around problems.
2.Hill is with Prost probably technically the best driver ever. He was excellent test driver and he was able to make the car work for him...
3.Damon didnt look like he was ever on the edge. When the car was good(he had made it very good) he was able to run very close to the edge but i wonder if he ever really drove on the edge.
4.Hill wasnt really good under pressure. Especially Michael was able to mentally offbalance Damon few times when pressure was on.
5.Hill worked well especially with the engineers. But otherwise i wonder if he ever was a teams favourite driver.
6.There were no tracks where Damon was clearly exceling. When the car was suiting he was fast everywhere.
JV
1.Fancies stiff setup. Likes to brake on straight line and as late as possible.
2.I really dont have that much knowledge on JV`s technical ability but as far as i know no one rates him to be a star on that area...correct if i am wrong.
3.Really good on the edge. In fact there is not "crazier" driver in F1 at the moment.
MH is naturally faster in really fast corners but JV makes up the difference by totally committing himself.
4.JV`s best quality is by far his head. His is really cool headed and tough customer. Like MH he is at his best when the pressure is on.
5.Again i dont have much knowledge about this area but i`ll give it a try.
JV is a leader in the team. He knows what he wants from the team and doesnt hesitate to demand it.
Doesnt like PR or other non-driving related tasks of F1.
6.Faster the better...especially in Monza and Hockenheim. But also fast in Spa.
#4
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 10:54
Like Buzzing says, Hill had developing skills. If you look over his career I think you'll notice that teams have generally improved their performance while he was there, but dropped off after his departure. The most striking example of this is '97 Arrows. (I've post it before but) at the time of the first race of the season imagine a car which is as far behind the Minardis as the Minardis are behind the Ferraris and McLarens today. By the end of the season, driving this furthest-backrow car, Damon finishes 2nd in Hungary only after a mechanical failure robs him of the win, and qualifies 6 hundreths of a second off pole at the final race.
Same goes for the old Williams and even Jordan, whose performance is not as spectacular as last year.
I also noticed that drivers who have the experience of being teammates with Damon seem to improve their performances after/during this stint. This being Diniz (pre-'97 he was a pay-for-drive driver, but he matured to some respectability), HHF, and Ralf Schumacher. I guess that they are able to absorb something beneficial to them during this stint (setup etc.). More power to them.
And who can forget that unbelievable drive in Hungary. Rare in F1 these days that you see a performance you can hardly believe! Also that brave win in blindingly raining Suzuka '94, where he brought the title race down to the wire.
Same goes for the old Williams and even Jordan, whose performance is not as spectacular as last year.
I also noticed that drivers who have the experience of being teammates with Damon seem to improve their performances after/during this stint. This being Diniz (pre-'97 he was a pay-for-drive driver, but he matured to some respectability), HHF, and Ralf Schumacher. I guess that they are able to absorb something beneficial to them during this stint (setup etc.). More power to them.
And who can forget that unbelievable drive in Hungary. Rare in F1 these days that you see a performance you can hardly believe! Also that brave win in blindingly raining Suzuka '94, where he brought the title race down to the wire.
#5
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 11:16
Damon's weaker points were that he did not always start well and he was not at his best in heavy traffic.
But if he had the lead and clear track, off he would go. He was also a very good qualifier. The scenes I remember best and enjoyed most of '96 are those qualifying duels Damon had with blindingly fast JV, JV who, after Damon's departure would utterly dominate HHF, the man who was supposed to possibly be the "fastest German".
(OT I feel it such a shame that Williams changed from their beautiful royal blue of those days to this dingy red they have now.)
But if he had the lead and clear track, off he would go. He was also a very good qualifier. The scenes I remember best and enjoyed most of '96 are those qualifying duels Damon had with blindingly fast JV, JV who, after Damon's departure would utterly dominate HHF, the man who was supposed to possibly be the "fastest German".
(OT I feel it such a shame that Williams changed from their beautiful royal blue of those days to this dingy red they have now.)
#6
Donny
-
- 329 posts
- Joined: July 00
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 11:53
Samurai,
Williams are not red anymore. If you are referring to the Rothmans livery, yes it was stunning.
I think the comments thus far are fair. But I would like to see some more analysis on JV's style. By and far in most conversations it is reckoned that in terms of apples for apples, he is the one who is better than MS.
Williams are not red anymore. If you are referring to the Rothmans livery, yes it was stunning.
I think the comments thus far are fair. But I would like to see some more analysis on JV's style. By and far in most conversations it is reckoned that in terms of apples for apples, he is the one who is better than MS.
#7
BuzzingHornet
-
- 6,190 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:02
I don't think he is better than Schumacher at the moment, maybe in the future; more brave maybe but he's not as complete IMO. He is a great dry-weather racer but when will he learn to drive in the wet? Many compare his style to Mansell but Nigel was also pretty handy in the wet too...
He's great to watch when he's on a charge, I miss him at the sharp end of the field and hope he signs for Flav for 2001.
Villeneuve likes to set his car up for the fastest parts of Grand Prix circuits so he can try to take them flat. This is good, but often screws him on the rest of the lap. Also, he's prone to stacking his car, it will be a miracle if e gets through Spa without knocking a few corners off his BAR at Eau Rouge... the best drivers take it 99% flat and DON'T crash ;)
He's great to watch when he's on a charge, I miss him at the sharp end of the field and hope he signs for Flav for 2001.
Villeneuve likes to set his car up for the fastest parts of Grand Prix circuits so he can try to take them flat. This is good, but often screws him on the rest of the lap. Also, he's prone to stacking his car, it will be a miracle if e gets through Spa without knocking a few corners off his BAR at Eau Rouge... the best drivers take it 99% flat and DON'T crash ;)
#8
Donny
-
- 329 posts
- Joined: July 00
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:17
Buzzing,
You are now getting to what I have been thinking for quite a while now. I have noticed that in terms of set-up at most circuits, JV has set his car up so that he won't be passed on the straights running slightly slower downforce so that any overtaking attempt by a quicker CAR will have to be done on the twisty sections and therefore to quote R Dennis, "the mobile chicane" has been pretty slow across a lap and we have seen the likes of MH, RS, RB and MS fall foul to this ploy.
But as a layman, I reckon he as such has a tougher job during a lap than most drivers. Now in an instance where he is in a front running car with this kind of set-up, the move DC pulled on MS is what JV is capable of. Simply because less downforce on the straight will equal better speed and better braking.
You are now getting to what I have been thinking for quite a while now. I have noticed that in terms of set-up at most circuits, JV has set his car up so that he won't be passed on the straights running slightly slower downforce so that any overtaking attempt by a quicker CAR will have to be done on the twisty sections and therefore to quote R Dennis, "the mobile chicane" has been pretty slow across a lap and we have seen the likes of MH, RS, RB and MS fall foul to this ploy.
But as a layman, I reckon he as such has a tougher job during a lap than most drivers. Now in an instance where he is in a front running car with this kind of set-up, the move DC pulled on MS is what JV is capable of. Simply because less downforce on the straight will equal better speed and better braking.
#9
silver
-
- 518 posts
- Joined: July 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:29
Less wing does mean faster straight line speed but it does not mean better braking.
Of course more wing you have later you can brake.
That is the difference normally between DC and MH.
DC runs normally with a bit less wing than MH.
MH is better coming out of corner so even if he lacks the top speed he is still close enough to pass under brakes since he is running with more wing. That was demonstrated many times during last season (especially in France, A1-Ring and Hockenheim).
DC on the other hand relies more on the top speed.
Of course more wing you have later you can brake.
That is the difference normally between DC and MH.
DC runs normally with a bit less wing than MH.
MH is better coming out of corner so even if he lacks the top speed he is still close enough to pass under brakes since he is running with more wing. That was demonstrated many times during last season (especially in France, A1-Ring and Hockenheim).
DC on the other hand relies more on the top speed.
#10
magic
-
- 5,678 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:38
1. Driving style.
2. Technical knowledge/feedback
3. Performance on the edge
4. Performance under pressure
5. Ability within the team
6. Tracks at which they should excel
1. natural, karting from the age of 4, never stopped since.
2. must have picked up something in 25 years of racing.
3. what edge, i'm enjoying myself out there.
4. was, someone passing me, michael schumacher..this cannot be happening..crshh (short-circuit)
5. ich will es...jetzt!
6. slippery tracks ( it used to rain a lot on his father's kart-track in kerpen, germany).
extra:
ms the hardest working person in showbizz.
bernie proclaimed 25 years ago he wanted a german wdc.
what bernie wants is what bernie gets.
2. Technical knowledge/feedback
3. Performance on the edge
4. Performance under pressure
5. Ability within the team
6. Tracks at which they should excel
1. natural, karting from the age of 4, never stopped since.
2. must have picked up something in 25 years of racing.
3. what edge, i'm enjoying myself out there.
4. was, someone passing me, michael schumacher..this cannot be happening..crshh (short-circuit)
5. ich will es...jetzt!
6. slippery tracks ( it used to rain a lot on his father's kart-track in kerpen, germany).
extra:
ms the hardest working person in showbizz.
bernie proclaimed 25 years ago he wanted a german wdc.
what bernie wants is what bernie gets.
#11
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:46
Yeah Donny, they're white now, but that dingy red really made a bad impression on me.
#12
Schumi Fan
-
- 1,020 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:46
Samurai,
Then came 1999...
Are you talking about Schumacher? What happened to Williams after Hill left? EIGHT wins! JV won the WDC! What happened to Benetton after Schumi left? ONE win!! And Benetton had the same Renault engine, and they kept Byrne and Brawn in 1996.
Are you sure Hill wasn't driving the Arrows moped? In such a car even Senna wouldn't have qualified within the 107% time!
JV who, after Damon's departure would utterly dominate HHF, the man who was supposed to possibly be the "fastest German"
Then came 1999...
If you look over his career I think you'll notice that teams have generally improved their performance while he was there, but dropped off after his departure.
Are you talking about Schumacher? What happened to Williams after Hill left? EIGHT wins! JV won the WDC! What happened to Benetton after Schumi left? ONE win!! And Benetton had the same Renault engine, and they kept Byrne and Brawn in 1996.
at the time of the first race of the season imagine a car (Arrows) which is as far behind the Minardis as the Minardis are behind the Ferraris and McLarens today
Are you sure Hill wasn't driving the Arrows moped? In such a car even Senna wouldn't have qualified within the 107% time!
#13
Billy
-
- 2,969 posts
- Joined: May 00
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:55
If you take the average qualifying position for tracks where they have been 5 or more times, and select the 8 best ...
MH top tracks (in order from best)
Nurburgring
Suzuka
Silverstone
Spa
Hockenheim
Magny Cours
San Marino
Monza
MS top tracks
Canada
Hungary
Monaco
San Marino
Nurburgring
Silverstone
Suzuka
Catalunya
MH top tracks (in order from best)
Nurburgring
Suzuka
Silverstone
Spa
Hockenheim
Magny Cours
San Marino
Monza
MS top tracks
Canada
Hungary
Monaco
San Marino
Nurburgring
Silverstone
Suzuka
Catalunya
#14
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 12:58
wow Schumi Fan great contribution
#15
Schumi Fan
-
- 1,020 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 13:06
Thanks Samurai, I'm glad you appreciate my effort as much as I appreciate yours...;)
#16
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 14:03
don't be in such a rush to thank me poor guy,,,
Now that you list all that stuff above, it really seems strange what happened at Benetton. On/off switch or some software? I hate to say it but you may unwittingly be giving proof to Frans's recent theory.
It would be nice if people didn't grow old, and that all factors remained constant so that Schumi Fan could cope with it.Originally posted by Schumi Fan
Then came 1999...
I see that you live in a simple world where a World Champion team abruptly becomes sh@t after one driver leaves. You think it's an on/off switch maybe?Are you talking about Schumacher? What happened to Williams after Hill left? EIGHT wins! JV won the WDC! What happened to Benetton after Schumi left? ONE win!! And Benetton had the same Renault engine, and they kept Byrne and Brawn in 1996.
Now that you list all that stuff above, it really seems strange what happened at Benetton. On/off switch or some software? I hate to say it but you may unwittingly be giving proof to Frans's recent theory.
strange outburst,,,,Are you sure Hill wasn't driving the Arrows moped? In such a car even Senna wouldn't have qualified within the 107% time!
#17
BuzzingHornet
-
- 6,190 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 14:07
There's a slight difference between Villeneuve & Frentzen and Alesi & Berger ;) Which two would YOU pick..!
#18
Todd
-
- 18,936 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 14:28
Spamarai,
Schumacher took his winning ways to Ferrari in 1996. 3 wins with none of his friends from Benetton and no Renault under the engine cover. That is more than Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, AND Mika Hakkinen COMBINED have achieved without Adrian Newey. Talk about reliance on outside help. That is much more circumstantial evidence that Michael Schumacher is the best than you'll ever assemble to prove that Benetton had green-hot rear brake discs.
There is a great deal of irony to this forum's rules. I'm pretty certain that there are rules regarding telling known untruths. If that is the case, how can Frans and Samarai be explained? At the same time, if anyone were to describe them in a completely accurate way, they would held in violation of the forum's rules of decorum.
Schumacher took his winning ways to Ferrari in 1996. 3 wins with none of his friends from Benetton and no Renault under the engine cover. That is more than Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, AND Mika Hakkinen COMBINED have achieved without Adrian Newey. Talk about reliance on outside help. That is much more circumstantial evidence that Michael Schumacher is the best than you'll ever assemble to prove that Benetton had green-hot rear brake discs.
There is a great deal of irony to this forum's rules. I'm pretty certain that there are rules regarding telling known untruths. If that is the case, how can Frans and Samarai be explained? At the same time, if anyone were to describe them in a completely accurate way, they would held in violation of the forum's rules of decorum.
#19
Billy
-
- 2,969 posts
- Joined: May 00
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 14:45
Originally posted by Samurai
I see that you live in a simple world where a World Champion team abruptly becomes sh@t after one driver leaves. You think it's an on/off switch maybe?
off Mansell at Lotus 1980-1984 0 wins, 1 pole position
on Senna at Lotus 1985,1986,1987 6 wins, 16 pole positions
off Lotus 1988-1994: 0 wins, 0 pole positions
on Schumi at Benetton 19 wins, 10 pole positions
off Benetton 1996-2000 1 win, 3 pole positions
on Senna at McLaren 1993 5 wins, 1 pole position
off McLaren 1994-1997 3 wins, 1 pole position
Advertisement
#20
Schumi Fan
-
- 1,020 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 15:16
Samurai, what are you on about? What's so strange about Benetton? As you know, the 1996 Benetton was designed by Byrne, had a Renault engine (not sure if the same spec as the 96 Williams'), and the master strategist was Brawn. They had 2 good drivers, "regenmeister"
Alesi and Berger who, IMO, would have become WDC in the 96 Williams.
Benetton before+ after Schumacher (10 years, including 2000):
6 wins
5 pole positions
13 fastest laps
Benetton with Schumacher (5 years, including 1991):
21 wins (2 for Herbert, so 19 Schumi)
10 pole positions
23 fastest laps
Ferrari between Prost and Schumi (4 years):
2 wins
4 pole positions
3 fastest laps
Ferrari with Schumi (4 years, omit 2000)
20 wins (4 for Irvine, so 16 Schumi)
13 pole positions
17 fastest laps (1 for Irvine, so 16 Schumi)
From the above list you can CLEARLY see Schumacher is just a mediocre driver. In Benetton's case, no other driver in the history of Formula 1 has had such an effect on a team's fortunes.
And what did you mean by that "strange outburst"? You said that "at the time of the first race of the season imagine a car which is as far behind the Minardis as the Minardis are behind the Ferraris and McLarens today". If the Minardi is about 3 sec slower than the Ferrari in qualifying, and the 1997 Arrows was 3 sec slower than the Minardi, it means that it was 6 sec slower than the Williams and Ferrari (yes, I know, the Ferrari was slower than the Williams, but you won't admit it). Given that the 107% time is, on average, 4 sec slower than pole, Hill must have been AT LEAST 2 sec faster than the next fastest guy on the track. Ayrton Senna wouldn't have qualified in such a car.
Alesi and Berger who, IMO, would have become WDC in the 96 Williams.Benetton before+ after Schumacher (10 years, including 2000):
6 wins
5 pole positions
13 fastest laps
Benetton with Schumacher (5 years, including 1991):
21 wins (2 for Herbert, so 19 Schumi)
10 pole positions
23 fastest laps
Ferrari between Prost and Schumi (4 years):
2 wins
4 pole positions
3 fastest laps
Ferrari with Schumi (4 years, omit 2000)
20 wins (4 for Irvine, so 16 Schumi)
13 pole positions
17 fastest laps (1 for Irvine, so 16 Schumi)
From the above list you can CLEARLY see Schumacher is just a mediocre driver. In Benetton's case, no other driver in the history of Formula 1 has had such an effect on a team's fortunes.
And what did you mean by that "strange outburst"? You said that "at the time of the first race of the season imagine a car which is as far behind the Minardis as the Minardis are behind the Ferraris and McLarens today". If the Minardi is about 3 sec slower than the Ferrari in qualifying, and the 1997 Arrows was 3 sec slower than the Minardi, it means that it was 6 sec slower than the Williams and Ferrari (yes, I know, the Ferrari was slower than the Williams, but you won't admit it). Given that the 107% time is, on average, 4 sec slower than pole, Hill must have been AT LEAST 2 sec faster than the next fastest guy on the track. Ayrton Senna wouldn't have qualified in such a car.
#21
Billy
-
- 2,969 posts
- Joined: May 00
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 16:23
In 1998, Ron Dennis looked back to the hollow years after Senna left in 1993:
It was a very difficult period of time for us. That's when we made a policy change and decided to develop younger drivers and arrive at a situation which Williams had then, where they were making such superior cars that a variety of drivers could win in them. Those cars flattered some drivers. Several people, and I was certainly one of them, recognised all this, and so our attitude was let's invest in the company, let's push harder to improve the resources within the organisation, then we can pick from several drivers and still win the races. And that's what we've done. We knew we would go into a trough on the way and that it would take some time to work out of, but we did it the way we wanted to do it
#22
Todd
-
- 18,936 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 16:34
Sounds like Ron has as good a definition of interchangeable Newey Passengers as any.;)
#23
JayWay
-
- 11,618 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 17:53
Todd,
"Schumacher took his winning ways to Ferrari in 1996. 3 wins with none of his friends from Benetton and no Renault under the engine cover. That is more than Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, AND Mika Hakkinen COMBINED have achieved without Adrian Newey."
That schtick is so old, and I think only you believe it holds any merit anymore.
"Schumacher took his winning ways to Ferrari in 1996. 3 wins with none of his friends from Benetton and no Renault under the engine cover. That is more than Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, AND Mika Hakkinen COMBINED have achieved without Adrian Newey."
That schtick is so old, and I think only you believe it holds any merit anymore.
#24
Todd
-
- 18,936 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 20:36
JayWay,
Damon's gone. Jacques still hasn't proved me wrong. David Coulthard has won his third race of the season in a Newey car. Wake up and smell the coffee. DC is the final straw. There is no driver that has spent more than a season in a Newey car without being a title contender now. You may have swallowed this illogical revisionism, but it is as obvious as ever that Michael Schumacher is far and away the best active driver.
Damon's gone. Jacques still hasn't proved me wrong. David Coulthard has won his third race of the season in a Newey car. Wake up and smell the coffee. DC is the final straw. There is no driver that has spent more than a season in a Newey car without being a title contender now. You may have swallowed this illogical revisionism, but it is as obvious as ever that Michael Schumacher is far and away the best active driver.
#25
jimm
-
- 3,228 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 21:03
Todd,
not true. HHF spent a year in a Newey designed car and DID NOT come close to winning the title and barely won 1 race.
not true. HHF spent a year in a Newey designed car and DID NOT come close to winning the title and barely won 1 race.
#26
Ellen2
-
- 801 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 21:26
Samurai is still watching last year races, that's why he sees the Williams red.......
ah, no he corrected himself, he sees them white (BMW will be happy to know that their BMW blue actually appears white in Japan)....
ah, no he corrected himself, he sees them white (BMW will be happy to know that their BMW blue actually appears white in Japan)....
#27
JayWay
-
- 11,618 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 11 July 2000 - 21:56
I'm awake and the coffee has gone bad. I still think your seeing things only on the surface, that long ass debate we had a while back, I layed out my whole opinion on the situation their and you didn't budge, fine, I don't care if your not gonna change your opinion, but I still think, pretty much know your wrong.
#28
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 00:54
Ellen
sorry, I made a mistake, they're pinkish aren't they?
sorry, I made a mistake, they're pinkish aren't they?
#29
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 01:11
Schumi Fan about the 107% etc. comparison,
the comparison I was making was like this:
I wanted people to visualize the Minardis (or Prosts) of today and compare them with the Ferraris and Macs. Can you imagine the Minardis developing their cars so that they beat Schumi, Mika (for example) and come in 2nd place on a clear weather race or get so close to pole, in any future race this year?
If we look at percentage differentials the Minardis of today are in a position half as close to the top as Arrows was to the leaders at the start of '97. That's what I meant.
And the essence of the feeling I was trying express before I got attacked, was simply the wonder as a Damon Hill fan I felt on that day of the Hungarian GP back in '97.
There have been rainy lotteries, races of attrition where lower tier team drivers have won, but in recent years I've never seen such a spectacular/surprise performance on a beautifully clear weather race day, such a dominant show of skill (the complete driver package, setup and all).
the comparison I was making was like this:
I wanted people to visualize the Minardis (or Prosts) of today and compare them with the Ferraris and Macs. Can you imagine the Minardis developing their cars so that they beat Schumi, Mika (for example) and come in 2nd place on a clear weather race or get so close to pole, in any future race this year?
If we look at percentage differentials the Minardis of today are in a position half as close to the top as Arrows was to the leaders at the start of '97. That's what I meant.
And the essence of the feeling I was trying express before I got attacked, was simply the wonder as a Damon Hill fan I felt on that day of the Hungarian GP back in '97.
There have been rainy lotteries, races of attrition where lower tier team drivers have won, but in recent years I've never seen such a spectacular/surprise performance on a beautifully clear weather race day
, such a dominant show of skill (the complete driver package, setup and all).
#30
Antony
-
- 68 posts
- Joined: July 00
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 04:49
samuri the main reason damon went so good at hungery 97 was his bridgestone tyres,every one knew it,even damon admitted it.
#31
Samurai
-
- 5,415 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 04:53
Antony, one question----
where were the other Bridgestone users?
They did well also?
I don't think so.
where were the other Bridgestone users?
They did well also?
I don't think so.
#32
BuzzingHornet
-
- 6,190 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 13:06
Exactly, Antony believes that Schumacher never actually gets beaten though ;) There must be a completely easy explanation for why Michael didn't win... Bridgestones! that was it. that explains why all the top six finishers were on Bridgestone rubber that day ;)
Its a pity some of his fans arn't as realistic as Schumacher himself... he said that Damon deserved to win
Its a pity some of his fans arn't as realistic as Schumacher himself... he said that Damon deserved to win
#33
Todd
-
- 18,936 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 13:27
Originally posted by jimm
Todd,
not true. HHF spent a year in a Newey designed car and DID NOT come close to winning the title and barely won 1 race.
jimm,
I said "more than a season in a Newey car." H2F spent one season in a Newey car. That is less than "more than a season." Newey had been long gone when the '98 Williams was designed. Read my posts more clearly before you second guess them.
JayWay,
You are a master of ignoring the obvious.
#34
JayWay
-
- 11,618 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 14:20
Todd,
I know you are but what am I?
I know you are but what am I?
#35
jimm
-
- 3,228 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 15:32
OK Todd,
I've got a couple of questions for you.
1) Is it your opinion that MS has NEVER been beaten on equal terms?
2) Is it also your opinion that all the other designers, apart from Newey, suck?
I've got a couple of questions for you.
1) Is it your opinion that MS has NEVER been beaten on equal terms?
2) Is it also your opinion that all the other designers, apart from Newey, suck?
#36
Laphroaig
-
- 456 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 12 July 2000 - 17:15
Hemm... this might fit in here...
We had a weird discussion while watching Coulthard overtake Schumacher in France;
Has Hakkinen ever overtaken Schumacher in a race situation?
(not counting starts, pitstops or mechanical failures)
Not that you can tie any big conclusions onto this, but we were just curious ;) (and couldn't think of any)
We had a weird discussion while watching Coulthard overtake Schumacher in France;
Has Hakkinen ever overtaken Schumacher in a race situation?
(not counting starts, pitstops or mechanical failures)
Not that you can tie any big conclusions onto this, but we were just curious ;) (and couldn't think of any)
