115 replies to this topic

[nojvnof1]

Quote

unfortunately, he did take it to the title.

by pulling one of the best bluffs in the history of the sport on supposedly the smartest driver out there at the time!!

[AutoRacer5]

But the stats say it all: 6 WDC to 1.

[nojvnof1]

True, true, but there's lies, then there's statistics!!  :wink: The move he used on M$ was worth two titles in itself  

[AutoRacer5]

But Schumi still has 6 titles

[Senna]

Quote

But Schumi still has 6 titles

The number of titles he has is made meaningless by the manner in which he won them.

[webber]

hay the FW19  looks gooooooooooooooooooooooooood not to fund of the FW11B but it looks good in the show room

[AutoRacer5]

Jacques has only 11 wins, MS over 70, 75 I think it is.

[nojvnof1]

Quote

Jacques has only 11 wins, MS over 70, 75 I think it is.

Jacques was in a race winning car for 2 seasons in 96-97. Of 33 races he won 11, not a bad strike rate, now imagine what it would have been had he had a race winning car for another 3 or 4 years, M$ would have nowhere near that much. He's been in the best cars in 94, 95, 2000-2004, so he should have that many wins. JV from 1998-2003 had anything but race winning cars, so you must take that into consideration.

[AutoRacer5]

Jacques did not know where the good opportunities laid, as MS did with Jordan going to Benetton in 91. He looked ahead at what was coming. JV was only focused on the here and now. Becuz Schumi knew what would most likely happen, he got a good drive, and he has gotten to the stats he has gotten today.

[Senna]

Schumacher didn’t want to go to Ferrari.  His manger spent a long time trying to convince him that it was the best long-term option…perhaps M$' foresight isn’t that great after all…

[AutoRacer5]

He's a pragmatist, lives in the present...He somewhat didn't know whether to take McLaren or Ferrari...Now there's a what if: Suppose MS went to McLaren...

[webber]

if M$ went to Mclaren then Ferrari whould bve nonthing and Mclaren will right now be winning the WCC and WDC

[Senna]

Ferrari was quite good before Michael Schumacher arrived – everyone assumes and falsely believes that they were rubbish.  Michael did improve the team but as I often say, he is just one man and one man does not constitute a team effort – for there are many other boffins at Ferrari who have made the team what it is today and their success is not simply down to Schumacher.  Further more, Schumacher is not the perfect driver as he succumbs to intense pressure and has been greatly aided by his team-mates and contractual status…

[nichosnz]

I don't think many people would argue against MS being aided, well no-one with eyes anyway.  But greatly, you really are closed minded on MS.

[AutoRacer5]

true...very true...

[Senna]

You both regard M$ as the best F1 driver ever and refuse to hear anything to the contrary.  In many respects I am more open minded than you.

[AutoRacer5]

yet again, true...true... and I meant that the 006's nose was slender... all of this came from that remark...

[nichosnz]

Yes I do regard MS as the best ever, but I will listen to 'anything to the contrary' I just have not yet been presuaded by any of it.  He does have faults, I admit that, but that is a different statement. Fangio, Moss, Clark, the Villeneuve's, Senna had faults too.  You are a Senna fan, I'll bet you have had people try to tell you he was not the best ever, yet you remain unpersuaded, by the way you worded your last post Alister, you are closed minded on the Senna issue.

To put it simply.
I am a MS fan, being a fan does not make you closed minded.
I will accept (even if I choose not to voice it) the he has fault, I don't see how that makes me closed minded.
You cannot accept ANY positives about MS, I see that as closed minded.

[Senna]

Michael Schumacher is a very good driver, arguably the best in F1 today, and he has many positive attributes: two of which are his impeccable physical fitness and his ability to push the car to the limits, posting successive fastest laps (as seen at this weeks French GP).  However, he has a number of faults which mean that in my eyes at least, Senna is the best GP driver ever; despite what the majority of the statistics indicate.  

For a start, although Michael Schumacher’s statistical achievements such as his number of career points and victories look, at first glance, to be mind-bogglingly good, if one looks deeper and analyses the situations and manner in which these records were achieved, the achievements diminish to a large extent.

Schumacher’s contractual status within Ferrari is a great bonus for him, the fact that none of his team-mates are of the same calibre of Senna’s - for whilst Senna battled Prost in equal machinery and without team orders in the heyday of F1, Michael races the likes of Brundle, Verstappen, Irvine and Barrichello etc whilst also using team orders, establishing himself as the clear NO: 1 driver, enabling him to take his team-mates car if he does not like the balance of his own car etc and when one adds to this the fact that Michael is given better machinery as well it certainly endangers the accuracy of the almost god-like image some have projected onto Michael Schumacher in recent times.  

Further more, Michael Schumacher can’t overtake on the race track and he also cracks when subjected to intense pressure and looses concentration when not put under any pressure at all.  Barrichello is also often very close to the World Champion’s pace, this is not as evident this year, as Barrichello is having a fairly poor season (although it was evident in the Australian, Canadian and USA GPs), but it was clearly seen last year where Barrichello was actually the best qualifier of the entire grid over the whole season (and thus a better qualifier than Michael.  He actually outraced Michael at the British and Japanese GPs too).  

There are two conclusions that one can reach from this data: either Rubens is underrated and is one of the best drivers ever as he is not much slower than `the best driver ever`, or Michael Schumacher is not as good as many people think, as he is not always substantially quicker than Barrichello (which perhaps he should be if he’s to be properly regarded as the best driver ever, as Rubens is good but certainly not one of the all-time greats…and Michael is on average, only around 0.2 sec per laps quicker than Rubens in very favourable circumstances for the German driver and quite unfavourable circumstances for Rubens.

I of course choose the latter option…

[nichosnz]

OK you are not as closed minded as you (seemingly deliberatly) put yourself across to be.  But please understand that I see faults in him (as I do all drivers, as mentioned above) so I do not see that as me being closed minded.

[AutoRacer5]

I do see that he cracks under extreme pressure, but Sato did come across his nose at Suzuka... He does have faults, but will do anything to win...

[Senna]

Regardless of his crash with Sato, Michael Schumacher had a poor race in Japan 2003.  He was hampered by rain in qualifying but so were a great many other drivers and some to a much greater degree – namely Ralf and Jarno whose laps were wrecked by the increasingly frequent and intensified rain.  In the race Schumacher failed to make up any real ground and finished a lowly eighth…however, that was just one race.

Michael Schumacher has a great many faults and a great degree of artificial help through contractual positions and inter-team preference etc which Senna didn’t have and you still seem to regard Schumacher as the greatest F1 driver ever: I find that puzzling.  Further more, you both failed to take a stance on my last point, is Rubens incredibly underrated and actually one of the best GP drivers ever – as he sometimes betters and is often very close to Schumacher, who you both regard as the greatest – or will you now concede, through logical reason, that Michael Schumacher is not the greatest F1 driver ever?  Through doing so one could still accept Michael Schumacher’s undoubted driving talent…

[nichosnz]

I think the answer to that is in 2 parts, yes Berrichello is quite underrated, and also that on top of that you seemingly overrate him.  Sometimes better and often close, in your words...  seems to me (very) Occasionally better and sometimes close.

But one of my key arguements (not main nor biggest but definatly key) is that it is a matter of OPINION.  Please remember that, you seem hell bent on not allowing MS fans to have their own opinions, you just want a whole load of Alister clones.

[AutoRacer5]

Correction: McLaren said that when Prost left, that Senna would be the undisputed number one at the end of 89'.

[Senna]

It’s a great pity that we didn’t see Ayrton Senna race Michael Schumacher for a longer period of time…If that had been the case, I’m sure you would now support Senna over Schumacher…

[AutoRacer5]

maybe, but maybe not...