Jump to content



- - - - -

Could Have Schumi Had 2 More?


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 WebRic

WebRic

    F1 Ace

  • Senior Members
  • 3,462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast,Queensland,Australia
  • Interests:Formula One-gotta love it

Posted 07 August 2013 - 12:12 AM

This question has always bugged me and is irelivant but never the less. Do you think Schumacher would have won the 99 title if he didnt break his leg? Or would have Mika still taken it? Would have Schumi been champion in 2006 if it wasn't for that spectacular engine failure he had while leading the Japanese gp.
Posted Image

#2 Ikyrotz

Ikyrotz

    Established Driver

  • Members
  • 426 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin, MA

Posted 07 August 2013 - 02:12 AM

View PostWebRic, on 07 August 2013 - 12:12 AM, said:

This question has always bugged me and is irelivant but never the less. Do you think Schumacher would have won the 99 title if he didnt break his leg? Or would have Mika still taken it?

Could've been close, but I think Mika would've snapped it. Mika lead the WDC before Schumi's accident, and in the end, Irvine was close because he actually drove very well and because Mika had a couple of retirements as well. Just took a look at the 1999 season results, and, had Schumi been able to race in the six events he missed, he needed higher points average in those races than he managed in the races he took part in, in order to win WDC. I think Mika would've taken it regardless.

#3 WebRic

WebRic

    F1 Ace

  • Senior Members
  • 3,462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast,Queensland,Australia
  • Interests:Formula One-gotta love it

Posted 07 August 2013 - 02:43 AM

View PostIkyrotz, on 07 August 2013 - 02:12 AM, said:



Could've been close, but I think Mika would've snapped it. Mika lead the WDC before Schumi's accident, and in the end, Irvine was close because he actually drove very well and because Mika had a couple of retirements as well. Just took a look at the 1999 season results, and, had Schumi been able to race in the six events he missed, he needed higher points average in those races than he managed in the races he took part in, in order to win WDC. I think Mika would've taken it regardless.

Good point,
What about 2006
Posted Image

#4 dribbler

dribbler

    Prostate Senna's fumes

  • Senior Members
  • 7,877 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Behind you, waaaaah!
  • Interests:Boobs, beer and bikes.

Posted 07 August 2013 - 05:21 AM

The fact that The Swerve ran Mika very close, means that Michael may have won it in '99.

2006 was not just about the Japan engine failure. Alonso had misfortunes too. In the end, he was a deserved winner. If 2005 was more about Ferrari's inability to make the tyres work, then '06 left me in no doubt about his edge over Michael.
Listening to    MSTRKRFT - Fist of God

Posted Image
Music connects people through the unspoken appreciation of something that sounds right. Something that taps into the deepest corners of your soul, making you feel alive. When someone else gets it too and you know they do, it feels beautiful.

"To be brutal and honest I don't have a thin skin and others who whine over every little thing will not curry favour. I'm just going to try to keep this place fun, as it has been for all of these years." Pumpdoc, 8th Decemeber 2010.

#5 WebRic

WebRic

    F1 Ace

  • Senior Members
  • 3,462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast,Queensland,Australia
  • Interests:Formula One-gotta love it

Posted 07 August 2013 - 06:10 AM

View Postdribbler, on 07 August 2013 - 05:21 AM, said:

The fact that The Swerve ran Mika very close, means that Michael may have won it in '99.

2006 was not just about the Japan engine failure. Alonso had misfortunes too. In the end, he was a deserved winner. If 2005 was more about Ferrari's inability to make the tyres work, then '06 left me in no doubt about his edge over Michael.

Iam aware fernando had issues to but Michael closed back a significant gap in the points to where I Beleive was only 2 points behind fernando when that failure struck in Japan, so if michael won wich he most likley would have, him and alonso would have been tied on points going into the last race,me personally have always thought 2006 was taken from him but 1999 not do sure.

Edited by WebRic, 07 August 2013 - 06:15 AM.

Posted Image

#6 Massa

Massa

    Terry Labonte Retired

  • Pit Crew
  • 3,452 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 August 2013 - 02:52 PM

I can only comment on 2006: the myth that Schumacher was robbed of anything is just so, so unfortunate for its very existence.

Fernando Alonso had an engine failure at Monza, a race Schumacher won.  Everyone seems to want to erase Schumacher's engine failure from history, but no one ever wants to remember that ten of the points Schumacher gained on Alonso came from an engine failure in the Renault.

Schumacher had an awesome season and did an excellent job, but look at the numbers in the hypothetical scenarios:

If you eliminate Schumacher's engine failure, he wins with Alonso P2.  So, that would be +10 for Schumacher and -2 for Alonso...meaning Alonso still wins 132 to 131.  Unless we get to magically change Brazil, too.

If you eliminate Schumacher's engine failure and Alonso's, you have Alonso getting around P4 (he wasn't having a great race) in Monza.  So, you add 5 to Alonso.  Now he's winning 137 to 131.

If you eliminate Alonso's engine failure and not Schumacher's, it's 139 to 121.

Under none of these scenarios does Schumacher ever have more points than Alonso.  How many races are we going to cast aside and rewrite to get Schumacher to P1?  Alonso needed no races, not even the ones from which he retired (neither of which were driver-caused retirements), to be amended for him to be the champion.  Schumacher needs at least two, with all Alonso races held constant, to do that.

Recall that each had two retirements (I want to say Schumacher crashed out of Melbourne, and had been racing outside of the points with guys like Liuzzi and Speed, anyway.  I might have misremembered).  So, they all had, for better or for worse, the same number of races in which to take maximum points, and in that same number of races, Alonso scored 13 more than Schumacher.

It was just not his championship.  What a pleasure to watch him and Alonso that year; 2006 was a very special season.
My avatar is not my work, but is in the public domain.  Releasing things into the public domain is a very nice thing to do if you ever can.

#7 Quiet One

Quiet One

    The balding avenger

  • Senior Members
  • 11,262 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Argentina

Posted 07 August 2013 - 03:39 PM

Saved me a lot of typing. I don't understand why people insists on chosing one random situation in a whole season and use it to demonstrate that someone else should have won it.
Why not choose Monza instead of Suzuka? And I don't mean Alonso's engine failure as Eric pointed out, but the ridiculous penalty for being in the same hemisphere as Massa? After all, engine failures in the car from the team you CHOSE to race for is also your responsability, but penalties pulled from out of the stewards arses are not. So following this logic I also assume that Nando's car would have suffered less stress from 5th and presumably won the race. And thus giving Schumi an even more crushing defeat in his last season.

But then...you could also gift Kimi with all the races in which he had some sort of misfortune. Or Montoya, thus avoiding being replaced by De La Rosa...

The list is endless. And completely irrelevant.
"There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the Universe, and it has a longer shelf life" - Frank Zappa

"Great drivers are the ones who win the races they're not supposed to" - K.Chandhok

#8 WebRic

WebRic

    F1 Ace

  • Senior Members
  • 3,462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast,Queensland,Australia
  • Interests:Formula One-gotta love it

Posted 07 August 2013 - 07:17 PM

View PostMassa, on 07 August 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

I can only comment on 2006: the myth that Schumacher was robbed of anything is just so, so unfortunate for its very existence.

Fernando Alonso had an engine failure at Monza, a race Schumacher won.  Everyone seems to want to erase Schumacher's engine failure from history, but no one ever wants to remember that ten of the points Schumacher gained on Alonso came from an engine failure in the Renault.

Schumacher had an awesome season and did an excellent job, but look at the numbers in the hypothetical scenarios:

If you eliminate Schumacher's engine failure, he wins with Alonso P2.  So, that would be +10 for Schumacher and -2 for Alonso...meaning Alonso still wins 132 to 131.  Unless we get to magically change Brazil, too.

If you eliminate Schumacher's engine failure and Alonso's, you have Alonso getting around P4 (he wasn't having a great race) in Monza.  So, you add 5 to Alonso.  Now he's winning 137 to 131.

If you eliminate Alonso's engine failure and not Schumacher's, it's 139 to 121.

Under none of these scenarios does Schumacher ever have more points than Alonso.  How many races are we going to cast aside and rewrite to get Schumacher to P1?  Alonso needed no races, not even the ones from which he retired (neither of which were driver-caused retirements), to be amended for him to be the champion.  Schumacher needs at least two, with all Alonso races held constant, to do that.

Recall that each had two retirements (I want to say Schumacher crashed out of Melbourne, and had been racing outside of the points with guys like Liuzzi and Speed, anyway.  I might have misremembered).  So, they all had, for better or for worse, the same number of races in which to take maximum points, and in that same number of races, Alonso scored 13 more than Schumacher.

It was just not his championship.  What a pleasure to watch him and Alonso that year; 2006 was a very special season.


It's just a random question, maybe it's the way I wrote it but iam not taken anything away from alonso or Renault. Fernando had a brilliant year he drove fantastic, your right Schumi scored a few points at renualts errors, but that's what has made him successful. His ability to deliver when needed. If Renault was more reliable, alonso would have had a pretty it lead at the end. Bit Schumi had some bad luck to. After his first retirement alonso went on to win the next 4 GPS. So I use this example because it was a stunning season by both IMO.
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


This website is unofficial and is not associated in any way with the Formula One group of companies. F1, FORMULA ONE, FORMULA 1, FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP, GRAND PRIX and related marks are trade marks of Formula One Licensing B.V.