Your Most Happy F1 Moment

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Adelaide '94.

I'm curious as to why? A championship was won by 1 driver deliberately crashing into another

[schumi4ever 0]

I'm curious as to why? A championship was won by 1 driver deliberately crashing into another

very debatable. I am the first to admit schumacher delibertely hit JV at jerez 97, but looking at replays of adelaide 94 schumacher simply kept his line. Hill was a bit too eager

[Jem of the Shire 0]

very debatable. I am the first to admit schumacher delibertely hit JV at jerez 97, but looking at replays of adelaide 94 schumacher simply kept his line. Hill was a bit too eager

hmm, i disagree. Only Schumacher himself knows the truth, but onboard replays show he turned in sharply, & he clearly knew Hill was there. I think the fact that he did it again at Jerez 97 only provides further evidence that he did it deliberately in 94

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

very debatable. I am the first to admit schumacher delibertely hit JV at jerez 97, but looking at replays of adelaide 94 schumacher simply kept his line. Hill was a bit too eager

uh-huh and when Schui parked the car in Monaco he thought it was his pit -box???!!!

I don't deny the guy's genius but even the nost die-hard Schui fan would have to admit that it was a bit suspicious (although Schui has not admitted to it, he has alluded to the fact in interviews he knew what he was doing).

[Jem of the Shire 0]

I've read 'F1 through the eyes of Damon Hill' (a great read) and Hill makes it absolutely clear in his book that he's certain it was deliberate

[schumi4ever 0]

I've read 'F1 through the eyes of Damon Hill' (a great read) and Hill makes it absolutely clear in his book that he's certain it was deliberate

haha thats not really a huge surprise...

Anyway i can see both sides to the issue, but to me personally looking at this footage it doesn't seem any different to most 'racing incidents' we see nowadays when drivers collide in corners. Of course schumacher wasn't going to just let hill through so easily, and i still maintain that hill was a bit ambitious with his move: youtube

[chennaiguy 0]

My happiest moment is described in my signature

[Argento Reloaded 1]

1970 (I think, never too hot on the years!)

Emerson Fittipaldi won at Watkins Glen - this meant that Jochen Rindt won the World Chamionship. Rindt is one of my all time heroes. I wept buckets of joy.

Jochen Rindt was the first (and I hope, last) posthumous World Champion.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I was a Jacky Ickx fan!!!

[Kati 0]

haha just too recent and maybe that's y im considering it my best... seb's 4th in china after the problems in japan! he yelling at the radio after it got me so happy that i couldn't sleep after that even though was 4am hehe

[Argento Reloaded 1]

australia 1987 when Nigel

[mikathegreat2 2]

That was gold...

but the guy had problems xD

Either that or when Winkelhock took the lead at the EU GP in a Spyker this season ! Pity he crashed later on in the race.

[Medilloni 6]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I was a Jacky Ickx fan!!!

I was too Argento! Just that Rindt was my favourite of and I've never been a Ferrari fan

Ickx? An master of the rain.

[dribbler 6]

I'm curious as to why? A championship was won by 1 driver deliberately crashing into another

Why? Because Damon was second rate compared to Michael. The best driver won. I only wish that Ayrton had been a live to see Michael beat him because i believe he would have.

I've read 'F1 through the eyes of Damon Hill' (a great read) and Hill makes it absolutely clear in his book that he's certain it was deliberate

That's certain then.

[Rainmaster 7]

uh-huh and when Schui parked the car in Monaco he thought it was his pit -box???!!!

I don't deny the guy's genius but even the nost die-hard Schui fan would have to admit that it was a bit suspicious (although Schui has not admitted to it, he has alluded to the fact in interviews he knew what he was doing).

I agree, maybe he will admit it in years to come.

Either that or when Winkelhock took the lead at the EU GP in a Spyker this season ! Pity he crashed later on in the race.

A Spyker leading is always going to be great.

Why? Because Damon was second rate compared to Michael. The best driver won. I only wish that Ayrton had been a live to see Michael beat him because i believe he would have.

That's certain then.

That is true, but it doesn't justify running someone off the road, if Schumacher was that great there would be no error in the first place.

[dribbler 6]

That is true, but it doesn't justify running someone off the road, if Schumacher was that great there would be no error in the first place.

You seem to be forgetting that the Williams was superior to the Benetton, by that stage. Not only that but i have never been convinced by the assumption that Michael ran Damon off the road.

[Max Mosley 2]

Yup. Michael was racing with a huge handicap.

[KoolMonkey 0]

Alonso didn't have the fastest car in '05 either, but he played it smart and did the numbers game. Had Lewis done that this year, he'd be the champ.

I remember watching that race live where Schumi crashed into Hill. It was blatant and totally unsporting, but he got away with it.

[Jean Todt 4]

Mika's first crown,

Mika's Spa move on Micheal.

Kimi's first win in 2002 Sepang,

Lewis First win this year.

Knowing that Fernando wont win the crown, and Happiness that Kimi won, but yet sad the way Lewis threw it. But Nando didnt win anyways.

[dribbler 6]

Alonso didn't have the fastest car in '05 either, but he played it smart and did the numbers game. Had Lewis done that this year, he'd be the champ.

I remember watching that race live where Schumi crashed into Hill. It was blatant and totally unsporting, but he got away with it.

Alonso did have arguably the fastest car in '05 and it was by far the most reliable. Not taking anything away from him though, he did a great job.

It's off season. It's time to discuss Adelaide '94 again! 'Blatant'? 'Totally unsporting'? But, he 'got away with it'? Hmm, good job no race stewards or F.I.A delegates were watching then. Hang on, they were? Oh, they must all be biased toward Michael then?

It was a racing incident, no more. Do the math; someone as successful as Michael, someone at the sharp end, fighting, will sometimes tangle with people. You go karting at the weekends. Wait until you have won ninety two times. Tell me how many times you made contact with people. Will i judge you as a man who deliberately causes accidents? Someone who is unsporting? No, i would say that you would be deemed as ruthless and ultra competitive. The two dozen clashes you would be involved in would be incidental. Not only because the eyes of the world aren't judging your every action but because in the grand scheme of things your obvious skill is the thing that would prevail.

Now put that in your Jerez, Adelaide and Rascasse pipe and smoke it.

[Rainmaster 7]

Alonso did have arguably the fastest car in '05 and it was by far the most reliable. Not taking anything away from him though, he did a great job.

It's off season. It's time to discuss Adelaide '94 again! 'Blatant'? 'Totally unsporting'? But, he 'got away with it'? Hmm, good job no race stewards or F.I.A delegates were watching then. Hang on, they were? Oh, they must all be biased toward Michael then?

It was a racing incident, no more. Do the math; someone as successful as Michael, someone at the sharp end, fighting, will sometimes tangle with people. You go karting at the weekends. Wait until you have won ninety two times. Tell me how many times you made contact with people. Will i judge you as a man who deliberately causes accidents? Someone who is unsporting? No, i would say that you would be deemed as ruthless and ultra competitive. The two dozen clashes you would be involved in would be incidental. Not only because the eyes of the world aren't judging your every action but because in the grand scheme of things your obvious skill is the thing that would prevail.

Now put that in your Jerez, Adelaide and Rascasse pipe and smoke it.

Hehe, well you can't prove that he deliberately turned in, but you can't just put it down to a racing incident either, as not all contact is. For me, it was an obvious attempt by Michael to take him out of the race, completely unsporting but I can understand it, the modern greats will often resort to these tactics, just look at Senna. Michael clearly went to the outside, then Hill cut to the inside, and Schumacher turns in on him. I wouldn't be so convinced of his guilt if it weren't for Jerez and Rascasse, at the end of the day he blemished his career with a few silly moments - but he was still the best of his era.

[KoolMonkey 0]

Alonso did have arguably the fastest car in '05and it was by far the most reliable. Not taking anything away from him though, he did a great job.

It's off season. It's time to discuss Adelaide '94 again! 'Blatant'? 'Totally unsporting'? But, he 'got away with it'? Hmm, good job no race stewards or F.I.A delegates were watching then. Hang on, they were? Oh, they must all be biased toward Michael then?

It was a racing incident, no more. Do the math; someone as successful as Michael, someone at the sharp end, fighting, will sometimes tangle with people. You go karting at the weekends. Wait until you have won ninety two times. Tell me how many times you made contact with people. Will i judge you as a man who deliberately causes accidents? Someone who is unsporting? No, i would say that you would be deemed as ruthless and ultra competitive. The two dozen clashes you would be involved in would be incidental. Not only because the eyes of the world aren't judging your every action but because in the grand scheme of things your obvious skill is the thing that would prevail.

Now put that in your Jerez, Adelaide and Rascasse pipe and smoke it.

The '05 McLaren was in a level of speed dominance not seen since the 80s. It was by far their fastest car since the 80s comparable to the other teams. How many times did Kimi get pushed back 10 places due to a car failure, then drive it up the field during the race. It was a rocket, but prone to constant failure. Alonso did not have the fastest car, but he used what he had the best if that makes any sense. He also didn't experience the failures that Kimi did. Had he done so, he wouldn't have been WDC.

[dribbler 6]

The '05 McLaren was in a level of speed dominance not seen since the 80s. It was by far their fastest car since the 80s comparable to the other teams. How many times did Kimi get pushed back 10 places due to a car failure, then drive it up the field during the race. It was a rocket, but prone to constant failure. Alonso did not have the fastest car, but he used what he had the best if that makes any sense. He also didn't experience the failures that Kimi did. Had he done so, he wouldn't have been WDC.

I don't agree. It became the faster car by year end but it wasn't as dominant as you claim. Prone to constant failure? Fact; Kimi retired twice in 2005, only one more time that Fernando. So when you say that had Kimi not failed as many times that he would have beaten him, it's simply not so.

Fernando drove a season in a measured and calculated way. But make no mistake, he was damned fast too.

[Max Mosley 2]

Alonso didn't have the fastest car in '05 either, but he played it smart and did the numbers game. Had Lewis done that this year, he'd be the champ.

Alonso did have arguably the fastest car in '05 and it was by far the most reliable. Not taking anything away from him though, he did a great job.

The '05 McLaren was in a level of speed dominance not seen since the 80s. It was by far their fastest car since the 80s comparable to the other teams. How many times did Kimi get pushed back 10 places due to a car failure, then drive it up the field during the race. It was a rocket, but prone to constant failure. Alonso did not have the fastest car, but he used what he had the best if that makes any sense. He also didn't experience the failures that Kimi did. Had he done so, he wouldn't have been WDC.

Not for the first time I tend to agree with Steve. The Renault was more reliable and not awfully slow for the whole year, hence it was arguably overall the better car. The important thing though, is that (probably) the best driver of the year couldn't compete at the front. So I don't think the WDC counted for as much as it claims to that year.

I remember watching that race live where Schumi crashed into Hill. It was blatant and totally unsporting, but he got away with it.

It's off season. It's time to discuss Adelaide '94 again! 'Blatant'? 'Totally unsporting'? But, he 'got away with it'? Hmm, good job no race stewards or F.I.A delegates were watching then. Hang on, they were? Oh, they must all be biased toward Michael then?

It was a racing incident, no more. Do the math; someone as successful as Michael, someone at the sharp end, fighting, will sometimes tangle with people. You go karting at the weekends. Wait until you have won ninety two times. Tell me how many times you made contact with people. Will i judge you as a man who deliberately causes accidents? Someone who is unsporting? No, i would say that you would be deemed as ruthless and ultra competitive. The two dozen clashes you would be involved in would be incidental. Not only because the eyes of the world aren't judging your every action but because in the grand scheme of things your obvious skill is the thing that would prevail.

Now put that in your Jerez, Adelaide and Rascasse pipe and smoke it.

Hehe, well you can't prove that he deliberately turned in, but you can't just put it down to a racing incident either, as not all contact is. For me, it was an obvious attempt by Michael to take him out of the race, completely unsporting but I can understand it, the modern greats will often resort to these tactics, just look at Senna. Michael clearly went to the outside, then Hill cut to the inside, and Schumacher turns in on him. I wouldn't be so convinced of his guilt if it weren't for Jerez and Rascasse, at the end of the day he blemished his career with a few silly moments - but he was still the best of his era.

I think he probably did deliberately crash into Hill, but good for him I say. If you need a non-contact girly sport, how about women's football, or cricket? Though I must admit, I do like the idea of tea and crumpets at Grands Prix weekends...

Also, Rainmaster: you know that Kimi cheats too? He admitted this year that he (used to) listen in to rival team radio communications!

[KoolMonkey 0]

Not for the first time I tend to agree with Steve. The Renault was more reliable and not awfully slow for the whole year, hence it was arguably overall the better car. The important thing though, is that (probably) the best driver of the year couldn't compete at the front. So I don't think the WDC counted for as much as it claims to that year.

I think he probably did deliberately crash into Hill, but good for him I say. If you need a non-contact girly sport, how about women's football, or cricket? Though I must admit, I do like the idea of tea and crumpets at Grands Prix weekends...

Also, Rainmaster: you know that Kimi cheats too? He admitted this year that he (used to) listen in to rival team radio communications!

All the drivers did. Kimi wasn't the one sitting there with a scanner listening in on the conversations. Obviously an employee of McLaren had already recorded the conversation and the drivers were able to listen to it in the briefing room. At that time it was common practice for all the teams to be listening in on each others radios. Is it cheating when they all do it, and they all know the other teams are doing it to them? Technically yes, but hardly in the same category as having 700+ pages of designs and data from a particular team.

[KoolMonkey 0]

I don't agree. It became the faster car by year end but it wasn't as dominant as you claim. Prone to constant failure? Fact; Kimi retired twice in 2005, only one more time that Fernando. So when you say that had Kimi not failed as many times that he would have beaten him, it's simply not so.

Fernando drove a season in a measured and calculated way. But make no mistake, he was damned fast too.

How many times did Kimi's car incur the 10 position penalty in qualifiny? I tried looking this up just now but haven't found much. I know it was 4-5 times he was sent packing. Despite this he won just as many races as Alonso at 7 a piece. Factor in him probably winning those 2 races (at least the Nurburg one) and also fastest laps at 10 vs 2, and yes I still believe Kimi's car was a freaking rocket. It was just terribly unreliable though.