Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

shields

Shummacher Myths To Be Destroyed One By One...

Recommended Posts

A recent Top Gear episode aired a quote of Senna's that applies here:

By being a racing driver you are under risk all the time. By being a racing driver means you are racing with other people. And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver because we are competing, competing to win. And the main motivation is to compete for victory, it’s not to come 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th. I race to win as long as I feel it’s possible. Sometimes you get it wrong? Sure, it’s impossible to get it right all the time. But I race designed to win, as long as I feel I’m doing it right.

I agree with this and don't condemn Mikey one bit for his move. Or any driver in a similar situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent Top Gear episode aired a quote of Senna's that applies here:

By being a racing driver you are under risk all the time. By being a racing driver means you are racing with other people. And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver because we are competing, competing to win. And the main motivation is to compete for victory, it’s not to come 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th. I race to win as long as I feel it’s possible. Sometimes you get it wrong? Sure, it’s impossible to get it right all the time. But I race designed to win, as long as I feel I’m doing it right.

I agree with this and don't condemn Mikey one bit for his move. Or any driver in a similar situation.

Really? This was for 10th, he made a mistake and RB had him and this would have been a clean pass on the straight section of the track. To approve of MS's dangerous moves would mean you are in favour of carnage on the track. Why not just issue pistols. So not only do you need to drive well, but you need to be a good shot too. Come on Autumnpuma you must be joking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Condoning recklessness like that is like saying below the belt punching is okay in boxing. I want F1 to contain an element of danger and be an exciting sport but as with anything there has to be a limit. MS crossed the limit, he is not the only driver to have done so, but he is certainly the most consistent and worst offender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Accepting', not 'excepting'. Pardon, cest le vin rouge.

"c'est" not "cest". Pardon, c'est le twat pédant.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent Top Gear episode aired a quote of Senna's that applies here:

By being a racing driver you are under risk all the time. By being a racing driver means you are racing with other people. And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver because we are competing, competing to win. And the main motivation is to compete for victory, it’s not to come 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th. I race to win as long as I feel it’s possible. Sometimes you get it wrong? Sure, it’s impossible to get it right all the time. But I race designed to win, as long as I feel I’m doing it right.

I agree with this and don't condemn Mikey one bit for his move. Or any driver in a similar situation.

I agree with Senna in essence, but don't forget this comment was a desperate response to Suzuka 1990, itself a terrible piece of driving by Senna.

The difference between what Ayrton is describing and what Michael did though is that Senna is talking about going for gaps, Michael was closing a gap, on a straight when Barrichello already had a speed advantage to the extent that a pass was inevitable. Is it correct for the car being passed to alter his line on a straight which makes the driver behind lift? Seeing that he was going to be overtaken, Michael should have picked a side and stuck to it, making Rubens go to one side or the other. Pushing him towards the wall when he is already committed to that line and then saying he should have gone to the other side, is unacceptable, to me. Don't confuse this with my desire to see close, wheel to wheel racing. I just want it fair and respectful, a la McLaren at Turkey this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two very good examples of sportmanship: Senna and MSC. Both had talent and were among the best of all time but both lacked the CLASS of Fangio, Clark and Mika Hakkinen for example. And as hard as you train you can´t improve: CLASS is regarding values and education.

So MSC have lots of money and travelled acroos the world -many times. What did he learn? Not much...

If MSC is the paradigm of a succesfull man, I prefer to be a loser and don´t have to explain to my kids why I´m so son of a beach!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two very good examples of sportmanship: Senna and MSC. Both had talent and were among the best of all time but both lacked the CLASS of Fangio, Clark and Mika Hakkinen for example. And as hard as you train you can´t improve: CLASS is regarding values and education.

So MSC have lots of money and travelled acroos the world -many times. What did he learn? Not much...

If MSC is the paradigm of a succesfull man, I prefer to be a loser and don´t have to explain to my kids why I´m so son of a beach!

Good point. The difference is the majority of us care about how we are perceived in the midst of our winning endeavours. Or to use Jackie Stewart's auto biography title 'winning is not enough'. In other words, you need to be a wholesome individual and hold your head up high. Well, at least that's what Jackie held important to him.

As Martin Brundle said in the BBC post-race forum, Michael could have had less race wins and less titles and been revered by the sport the whole world over with an impeccable reputation. The thing is, he really doesn't care what people think. So, 91 wins, and seven titles it is, tainted by a thick black cloud, which is currently getting darker and darker.

I wonder how Ayrton's reputation would have looked by now, had he lived and carried on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that Senna's death has changed the way people remember him, it helps people to gloss over some of the less appealing traits. Maybe that's why Schumi is trying to kill himself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your quote:

"I know what die hard fans will say (those who did not follow my advise). He is old but for his age he is doing more than he should... It is always like that: "he is always making miracles... It is never the car, the team or his engineers... "

This only when he won, today that he is not winning is the car, the team, the engineers, and most recently bridgestone for not providing him the front tyres he needs......

http://en.espnf1.com/mercedes/motorsport/story/25304.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your quote:

"I know what die hard fans will say (those who did not follow my advise). He is old but for his age he is doing more than he should... It is always like that: "he is always making miracles... It is never the car, the team or his engineers... "

This only when he won, today that he is not winning is the car, the team, the engineers, and most recently bridgestone for not providing him the front tyres he needs......

http://en.espnf1.com/mercedes/motorsport/story/25304.html

Let us see what happens when the playing field is levelled by the introduction of Pirelli next year. If Michael continues to be significantly out paced by Rosberg, then Brawn won't be able to reason his lack of performance from the tyres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. The difference is the majority of us care about how we are perceived in the midst of our winning endeavours. Or to use Jackie Stewart's auto biography title 'winning is not enough'. In other words, you need to be a wholesome individual and hold your head up high. Well, at least that's what Jackie held important to him.

As Martin Brundle said in the BBC post-race forum, Michael could have had less race wins and less titles and been revered by the sport the whole world over with an impeccable reputation. The thing is, he really doesn't care what people think. So, 91 wins, and seven titles it is, tainted by a thick black cloud, which is currently getting darker and darker.

I wonder how Ayrton's reputation would have looked by now, had he lived and carried on?

This was the central theory of my very first post in this forum, back in 2006 :D

Cav almost ripped off my balls with a teaspoon at the time...ah, memories! Good old times!

As for Senna, I think he could have _probably_ won as many WDCs as Schumi, but he would have _certainly_ did even more questionable moves than Michael. I am a huge fan of Ayrton, but fair play was an alien concept to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't mind me saying, there's truth to what Maure is stating about contradictory views.

Senna was (lets just say it as it is) a dirty barsteward of a racing driver. He whined constantly. Yet people call him 'the God of F1'

There's a certain current F1 driver, who is constantly accused of being a whiner. By the same people who respect Senna no less. Come on guys, be fair.

The two are very similar. Whats the difference? Nothing much. I remember Senna being very petulant. I remember him in a press conference having a ten minute rant. I remember him knocking on Irvine's caravan door and punching his lights out. I remember Senna taking Prost out of the race. I recall him complaining over preferential treatment. I know this is the michael thread but it seems appropriate to put my piece of mind here.

So. Anyone for a game of spot the contradictions?

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So. Anyone for a game of spot the contradictions?

:)

Me! Me! Pick me!

Crashgate 2008: For the record, no one can accuse me of being pro Piquet Jr (George forbid!) or not recognising how dirty the whole scandal was. But there's something that always bothered me:

At the time, it was considered "criminal" what he did because he was "purposedly jeopardizing the lives of other drivers, crew members and the public". And the guy made a "controlled crash" (so to speak) against the inner wall at the exit of a corner. In terms of endangering lives, it was a joke compared with squeezing another car at 300km/h against a wall.

The crashgate was a dirty cheat, it was risky as well, but I don't think you can consider that one a criminal move and this one just a rough but legal move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me! Me! Pick me!

Crashgate 2008: For the record, no one can accuse me of being pro Piquet Jr (George forbid!) or not recognising how dirty the whole scandal was. But there's something that always bothered me:

At the time, it was considered "criminal" what he did because he was "purposedly jeopardizing the lives of other drivers, crew members and the public". And the guy made a "controlled crash" (so to speak) against the inner wall at the exit of a corner. In terms of endangering lives, it was a joke compared with squeezing another car at 300km/h against a wall.

The crashgate was a dirty cheat, it was risky as well, but I don't think you can consider that one a criminal move and this one just a rough but legal move.

Yes as ever with that there was some stupid outcry saying it was extremely dangerous, no doubt. But most reasonable people probably thought it was "criminal" in the sense it was fraudulent rather than dangerous. I think. For all I know I may have been one of those who condemned it on safety grounds! I can't remember :lol:

As for contradictions between Schumi and Senna, well it's obvious they were both from the same breed in terms of racing. The difference in the way they are perceived can be put down to a lot of things. Mostly (imo), that Senna seemed much more honest about his transgressions (eventually) whereas Schumi isn't (so far), which is something that most people really don't appreciate. Obviosuly Ayrton's tragic death buys him a lot of "forgiveness credits" too. Also, Senna always showed a much more human side than Schumacher to the F1 world so that helps his case a lot, as well as his charisma and other personality traits. Even nationality may play a part somewhere, with Senna being the brilliant, emotionally charged Brazilian and Schumacher being the tight lipped, steely German. My guess is all of those reasons are why people find it much easier to forgive Senna than Schumacher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for contradictions between Schumi and Senna, well it's obvious they were both from the same breed in terms of racing. The difference in the way they are perceived can be put down to a lot of things. Mostly (imo), that Senna seemed much more honest about his transgressions (eventually) whereas Schumi isn't (so far), which is something that most people really don't appreciate. Obviosuly Ayrton's tragic death buys him a lot of "forgiveness credits" too. Also, Senna always showed a much more human side than Schumacher to the F1 world so that helps his case a lot, as well as his charisma and other personality traits. Even nationality may play a part somewhere, with Senna being the brilliant, emotionally charged Brazilian and Schumacher being the tight lipped, steely German. My guess is all of those reasons are why people find it much easier to forgive Senna than Schumacher.

Very well put.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on Autumnpuma you must be joking.

Maybe so. My views on F1 in specific and racing in general are quickly becoming outdated, hell, they may have been obsolete 10 years ago. What I know from long experience as being 'correct' is no longer thought to be correct. Safety first is the motto of the day. Battling on track has degenerated into a strange waltz with track stewards and rules. Forgotten is the simple notion that you get in the car and you race to win. You don't race to save other people's feelings, you don't race to give the other guy room. You race to win. I suppose my view is more cutthroat than is acceptable these days. All you gentle souls wanting a sterile, regulated procession puzzle me.

I keep coming back to this little corner of the web to chat with others that love racing, but fewer and fewer people relate to what I say and I'm often disputed more than agreed with. That is telling. Whether you're all right or I'm right is irrelevant. We aren't of like-minds anymore it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so. My views on F1 in specific and racing in general are quickly becoming outdated, hell, they may have been obsolete 10 years ago. What I know from long experience as being 'correct' is no longer thought to be correct. Safety first is the motto of the day. Battling on track has degenerated into a strange waltz with track stewards and rules. Forgotten is the simple notion that you get in the car and you race to win. You don't race to save other people's feelings, you don't race to give the other guy room. You race to win. I suppose my view is more cutthroat than is acceptable these days. All you gentle souls wanting a sterile, regulated procession puzzle me.

I keep coming back to this little corner of the web to chat with others that love racing, but fewer and fewer people relate to what I say and I'm often disputed more than agreed with. That is telling. Whether you're all right or I'm right is irrelevant. We aren't of like-minds anymore it seems.

Bah, no need to be so drastic. I enjoy a good boxing match. I accept the carnage inside the rules. I would not like watching a guy pulling out a knife, and I certainly don't enjoy when they let carnage go too far.

I like a gladiator's fight. I don't condone mere slaughtering. I can easily enjoy risky moves in F1 (is not a coincidence that Montreal with its unforgiving wall is my favorite track) without having to rejoice if old Rubinho gets squshed against a wall at full speed because of Schumi's antics.

And if none of this is what you meant, then...ermm...I'm still the best.

So there. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so. My views on F1 in specific and racing in general are quickly becoming outdated, hell, they may have been obsolete 10 years ago. What I know from long experience as being 'correct' is no longer thought to be correct. Safety first is the motto of the day. Battling on track has degenerated into a strange waltz with track stewards and rules. Forgotten is the simple notion that you get in the car and you race to win. You don't race to save other people's feelings, you don't race to give the other guy room. You race to win. I suppose my view is more cutthroat than is acceptable these days. All you gentle souls wanting a sterile, regulated procession puzzle me.

I keep coming back to this little corner of the web to chat with others that love racing, but fewer and fewer people relate to what I say and I'm often disputed more than agreed with. That is telling. Whether you're all right or I'm right is irrelevant. We aren't of like-minds anymore it seems.

I don't think your view is out of date, I just think it's naively blood thirsty. The word naive might be taken as a bit of an insult and it's not intended that way, I just remember thinking this the last time you expressed this view; I would dearly like you to go to a motor race and experience first hand blood and guts spilled out on a track. Or maybe to hear the screams of a driver as he burns to death in his car. If in the process you saw a good motor race and left the circuit with that being the overriding feeling, then fair play to you, you got what you wanted. Thing is Mike, you are a rational, caring and sensitive human being, so I don't think for one minute you would feel good. It's just that it might take a situation like this to change your opinion that racing comes first over safety.

Jackie Stewart pushed for change because he knew it had to change. I don't think he was a lesser racer as a result. Same as me as a fan. I want hard wheel to wheel action with no quarter given. But I don't want blood. Please stop this attitude that somehow your desires for racing are different to ours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so. My views on F1 in specific and racing in general are quickly becoming outdated, hell, they may have been obsolete 10 years ago. What I know from long experience as being 'correct' is no longer thought to be correct. Safety first is the motto of the day. Battling on track has degenerated into a strange waltz with track stewards and rules. Forgotten is the simple notion that you get in the car and you race to win. You don't race to save other people's feelings, you don't race to give the other guy room. You race to win. I suppose my view is more cutthroat than is acceptable these days. All you gentle souls wanting a sterile, regulated procession puzzle me.

I keep coming back to this little corner of the web to chat with others that love racing, but fewer and fewer people relate to what I say and I'm often disputed more than agreed with. That is telling. Whether you're all right or I'm right is irrelevant. We aren't of like-minds anymore it seems.

Well. I have to dispute the second half of your post.

Nobody agrees with you? Am I a fluff fairy that doesn't exist?

-gets a huff on-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:unsure:

Great post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not serious are you? They were in different cars...

By your reasoning Alonso was better than MS, hands down...

And Mika... And JV in 1997...

YHR, agree with you, and that was exactly one of the points I was trying to make...

Kopite,

Did you at least agree to what I wrote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kopite,

Did you at least agree to what I wrote?

You can call me Steph, much easier than Kopite!

Different cars, granted. But we're talking different era's. How can you compare Senna against Massa. You can find similarities but they are completely incomparible.

Surely you agree with that?

And its nice to be able to get into a topic without there being any animosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bah, no need to be so drastic. I enjoy a good boxing match. I accept the carnage inside the rules. I would not like watching a guy pulling out a knife, and I certainly don't enjoy when they let carnage go too far.

I like a gladiator's fight. I don't condone mere slaughtering. I can easily enjoy risky moves in F1 (is not a coincidence that Montreal with its unforgiving wall is my favorite track) without having to rejoice if old Rubinho gets squshed against a wall at full speed because of Schumi's antics.

And if none of this is what you meant, then...ermm...I'm still the best.

So there. :unsure:

Are you an attorney? Good answer, something likin winning respecting the rules...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...