Schumacher,hakkinen,suzuka 1999

[Emmcee 0]

This one question has been on my mind for quite some time. Back in 1999 when Schumacher was out for several races with a broken leg, Eddie Irvine did a fine job to keep the fight up to Mclaren and in particular Mika Hakkinen. When Schumi returned in Malaysia that year, he grabbed pole and helped Irvine win the race and take a 4 point lead over Hakkinen going into the last race. Last race was of course Suzuka, Schumacher had pole once again and towards the end of the race he found himself in a duel for the lead with Hakkinen with Irvine running miles back in third. Hakkinen won with Schumacher 5 seconds back and Irvine over a minute behind in third. Hakkinen took the title by two points. Now what I've always wondered, since Schumi was super quick when he came back, did he finish 2nd on purpose so Irvine wouldn't break ferraris 21yr drought for a world title and thus distroy all of Schumacher's work and plans? Only he will ever know that question, but I've always thought about that one, what you think?

[BrisbaneAndy 0]

I am going to be charitable and say he tried his best to help Irvine win the title.

I cannot remember the race except I was pleased to see Hakkinen win the WDC for McLaren.

[Emmcee 0]

I like to think that, but, well only he will ever know I guess. Other thing, how come Irvine was never that competitive when Schumi was there? Extra support when Schumi was away?

[radical-one 0]

I was in Malaysia ( Sepang's inaugural) that time and also in Suzuka. I had the pleasure in watching it both live.

Michael was helping Eddie win against Mika tha's why He purposely pushed back Mika behind him in third place.

Schumi came back from a leg injury (was replaced by Mika Salo) until the Malaysia GP (penultimate round then).

Schumi was supporting Irvine to win the Championship. But Irvine's pace was not good enough in Suzika so he lost. He needed to be ahead of Mika Hakinnen to win the trophy but end up 2 points behind to take the runner up. Schumi end up 44 points.

I remember Irvine commenting (in Sepang) that Micheal is not only the best driver but also the best 2nd driver.

[Emmcee 0]

Yeah but if Schumi won, hakkinen would have ended up with 4 points less than he did, Irvine had 70, Hakkinen had 66. Hakkinen won so it took his tally up to 76 as you only got ten points for a win back then. Irvine finished third so it took his tally up to 74. But if schumi won and mika finished second, Mika would have finished with a total of 72 points therefore Eddie would have been champion by two points. But now you mentioned it, I do remember Martin and Murray commenting on Irvines pace saying exactly what you did.

[pabloh20 1]

Ermmmm didn't Hakkinen beat Schumi from the start and Schumi never really got that close, Hakkinen pretty much controlled the pace?

[Emmcee 0]

I think so, but there were times and going of his recent pace earlier that weekend, he was catching Mika at one point. That's what started the whole "will Schumi pass him" comments.

[Delivery_Driver 0]

If Ferrari got Eddies tyres out at the European GP that year, he probably would have won the title. All those drivers had a strange year, Hill had no interest competing that year, who knows what would have happened if schumi didn't break his leg? Might have been a 8 time world champion? DC was lucky to end up with a drive for the year 2000 after his topsy turvy year, cost McLaren the 1999 constructors title, Zanardi was no where as well, the runner up Irvine, was getting beaten by his substitute Mika Salo, and Hakkinen had 2 dramatic crashes that season, the driver who actually deserved the title was Heinz Harald Frentzen

[Delivery_Driver 0]

Tbh, I do think Michael tried his absolute best, but the better man won in a straight fight, Mika Hakkinen, Europe 1998, hakkinen beat MSC in another cliff hanger, I don't think schumi was dawdling around at the European GP, again the better man won on the day

[Emmcee 0]

Tbh, I do think Michael tried his absolute best, but the better man won in a straight fight, Mika Hakkinen, Europe 1998, hakkinen beat MSC in another cliff hanger, I don't think schumi was dawdling around at the European GP, again the better man won on the day

nurburgring 1998 hakkinen beat Schumi in a flatout fair and square battle.

[Delivery_Driver 0]

And what a classic race that was, but I believe Mika beat Michael in a straight fight as well at Suzuka, the 1999 Ferrari was not quite as good as the Mclaren

[Emmcee 0]

Well he ripped away of the line ahead of Schumi but I remember at some point he was closing the gap and Martin even mentioned it Schumi could "authentically" catch Mika.

[Delivery_Driver 0]

Hmmm but Eddie Irvine was not worthy of a world title, he was a very good driver, but everyone bags out Jacques Villeneuve about not being worthy of his 1997 title or Jenson Button not being worthy of his 2009 title, imagine what everyone would have said about Eddie if he won the 99 title, he would be dis-owned lol

[Emmcee 0]

You do have a point, wouldn't feel quite right would it? I know what you mean.

[BrisbaneAndy 0]

For several reasons, having Schumacher win it for him being one. Hakkinen deserved it, I agree, Irvine did not.

[Emmcee 0]

That's right, Mika was quickest when it counted, but I still always will wonder, just how harder Schumi could have pushed in Suzuka 1999

[Delivery_Driver 0]

Probably 9/10's but it was irvines fault he wasn't up there anyway, he was the one who crashed out in qualifying at Suzuka, he was the one who was stuck behind the GREAT Olivier Panis who was on absolute fire that weekend, after the great start olly made, and he wasn't crawling all over the Prost Peugeot either was he, there was always a 1second gap or more, so Eddie bought it on himself for being out of contention, had nothing to do with How hard Michael pushed during the race as Eddie bought it upon himself

[BrisbaneAndy 0]

Irvine relying on Schumacher to win him the championship does not sit well. So, I agree.

[Emmcee 0]

Yeah your right, I rememeber now with him being stuck behind panis, it's all coming back. Bizarre concidering throughout his entire career, Suzuka was one if not the strongest circuit for him.

[Delivery_Driver 0]

In 1997 he did that pass on Hakkinen n Schumacher around the outside of the corner before Dunlop, the long right hander, the last corner of the snake section, then he roared off to a 12 second lead, only 4 team play to get involved n Schumacher passed him, but y was he beaten 2 second place by Heinz-Harald Frentzen? That's another mystery, I just watched the 1998 race, and even though he was on a 3-stopper compared to Mika's 2, he still kept the pressure up to him, but the one year he needed to put all his Suzuka nous into good effect, the pressure must have got to him, the following year, he was running 5th early on n kept Rubens Barrichello behind him, Eddie was in the Jaguar, but by the end of the race he found himself behind his team mate Johnny Herbert n finished 8th

[Jem of the Shire 0]

I like to think that, but, well only he will ever know I guess. Other thing, how come Irvine was never that competitive when Schumi was there? Extra support when Schumi was away?

Well actually Eddie was having a great season even before Schumi had his accident. I think the 2 Ferrari drivers were almost level on points at that stage of the year. Eddie weirdly got much more competitive each season from 96 onwards.

If Ferrari got Eddies tyres out at the European GP that year, he probably would have won the title. All those drivers had a strange year, Hill had no interest competing that year, who knows what would have happened if schumi didn't break his leg? Might have been a 8 time world champion? DC was lucky to end up with a drive for the year 2000 after his topsy turvy year, cost McLaren the 1999 constructors title, Zanardi was no where as well, the runner up Irvine, was getting beaten by his substitute Mika Salo, and Hakkinen had 2 dramatic crashes that season, the driver who actually deserved the title was Heinz Harald Frentzen

1999 was the best season ever! Bar the worst GP of all time (Spain '99)

For several reasons, having Schumacher win it for him being one. Hakkinen deserved it, I agree, Irvine did not.

I've always been of the thinking that whoever won it, deserves it. If Irvine won it it's because Hakkinen didn't get enough points to win it himself. Hakkinen was always faster but he and his team made several mistakes. And although team orders would've helped Irvine, team orders were perfectly legal, so if he had won that title then IMO he would've been the deserving champ!

On the original question I do think Schuey tried his best to win the Japanese GP.