Michael Schumacher

The Vettel thread surprised me as such that when I searched for a Schumacher thread, I could not find one. So I propose this thread for Schumacher because regardless of your opinion whether his return is succesful or not, I think we can all agree that there's always something to talk about whether he's had a good or bad race.
Historical Discussion may be allowed on the thread as long as it's on topic.
Enjoy! :)
 
Ray, I agree with almost all of that, your comments though are more against other drivers than in praise of Schumacher. Which I think is what you are meaning to do.
;)
 
Gethin, Sir:

I think Schumacher was a top line Ace who had the playing field mainly to himself after Senna was killed. Schumacher went up against a less than stellar crop between mid 1994 to, say, 2003. Hakkinen was the only other Ace on the grid between the time Senna was killed and the arrival of Raikkonen and Alonso in competitive cars.

This, in conjuction with the advantages that the Ferrari/FIA relationship brought, the Brigdestone partnership brought and the Unlimited Budget/Testing brought helped pad Schumacher's stats, especially since Ferrari had contractual Number 2s recruited into the other car.

The fact that Barrichello was ordered to move over in Austria '01 and Austria '02 (each only about the 6th race of those year's championships) highlights the fact that Ferrari only had contractual Number 2 calibre drivers in the other car between 1996-2006. Alonso was never going to go there under that scenario...and neither was Raikkonen.

Cheers.
 
So if I were to 'rank' Shumacher in the post Nuvolari - Fangio - Moss - Clark - Brabham - Rindt -Stewart era, i'd go with:

1. Senna
1= Prost
3. Schumacher
4. G Villeneuve
5. Hakkinen
6. Lauda
7. Raikkonen
8. Mansell
8= Piquet

...With the possibility of Vettel / Hamilton / Alonso going anywhere between 3rd and 7th depending how they end up. That means i'm leaving open the possibility of Hamilton / Alonso / Vettel leap-frogging a handful of drivers beneath the Top 2.
 
Ya. Fun reading. Brawn is full of questions. Even he doesn't know where Rosberg is in relation to Vettel/Hamilton/Alonso. As a result, Brawn doesn't even know how quick the Mercedes is. For all he knows, they may have the two best drivers but a useless car...OR ... you can twist it on it's head and say they might have a very good car but two drivers who aren't capable of making it a winner.
 
The Brits (including me) particularly love to beat on the successful and the boring. Born either of frustration or simply for the need to see a good old fashioned 'fight' and people duking it out...

Schumacher was both immensely successful and incredibly dull at the same time because of his inexorable successes leading to 7 world championships. Do people ever actually sit back and realise the magnitude of that achievement, even setting aside the controversies? I think not.

Crikey, I absolutely loathed the guy all those years yet still I found myself willing him to win in Canada this year.

Why?

Because he was the underdog. :dunno:
 
I despised Schumacher the first time around. I felt absolute disdain for him and this probably stems from being a D. Hill supporter.

But I really wanted to see him return, and not just return, see him give the new guys a run for their money, get podium's and race wins even. I am really disappointed we've not seen that (although I feel the car and the new technologies are playing a big part) and I really wanted to see a podium for him in Montreal. Now this is coming from a N. Rosberg fan also.

He seems to have much more humility about him this time around with a hint of the same old Schumacher.

That alone for me makes me realise that so far he has had the greatest impact on F1 racing of the era/s I've been following. It's always a sad day to say goodbye to a legend - for whatever reason. I for one am glad he returned and hopefully he will keep up the performance and it will be worthwhile.
 
I think Mercedes are about to throw in the towel on 2011 and are suggesting that if Nico and Schuey want an "excellent car" they'll have to wait til 2012.

If the EBD regulation changes hit Mercedes and Renault harder than others (as some pundits think), then you can bet Schumacher won't be putting up too many Canada-like performances after the next race.
 
In the end, the class of driver now is much greater: Hamilton replaced Montoya; Kubica replaced Villeneuve; Vettel replaced Coulthard...and Alonso and Button both beat Villeneuve as teammates in '03/'04.

And yet, nobody has replaced Schumacher - not to my mind, anyway.

I think he was at his peak in the late 1990s, and the racing then was far from dull. It should have been, because Adrian Newey's Williamses and McLarens were considerably superior to the opposition, but Michael was simply brilliant.

I've never known a driver carry such an air of inevitability about him. You just knew he would find those couple of seconds on his pit in lap. You just knew he would make the offbeat strategy work when nobody else could.

Maybe he didn't have the toughest opposition any champion has faced. I don't think I would disagree with that. But the margin by which he was better than them, for me, qualifies him for a place in the pantheon of the absolute best.
 
And yet, nobody has replaced Schumacher - not to my mind, anyway.

I think he was at his peak in the late 1990s, and the racing then was far from dull. It should have been, because Adrian Newey's Williamses and McLarens were considerably superior to the opposition, but Michael was simply brilliant.

I've never known a driver carry such an air of inevitability about him. You just knew he would find those couple of seconds on his pit in lap. You just knew he would make the offbeat strategy work when nobody else could.

Maybe he didn't have the toughest opposition any champion has faced. I don't think I would disagree with that. But the margin by which he was better than them, for me, qualifies him for a place in the pantheon of the absolute best.

In essence, you can define Schumacher by this:
  • In a rank awful car he could win races [1996]
  • In a half-decent car he could challenge for titles
  • In a good car he could win titles
  • In a great car he could not be stopped

Yes, yes and yes but why do I feel that he didn't 'deserve'.
 
I've never known a driver carry such an air of inevitability about him. You just knew he would find those couple of seconds on his pit in lap. You just knew he would make the offbeat strategy work when nobody else could.

So true, I always thought he and Boris Becker were cut from the same branch
 
In terms of determination and ability Jen

You gotta give MS that

Possibly so, but Boris was out there on his own and he had no recourse if he stuffed up - on the other hand, MS relied heavily on his 'team', his position within that team and, dare I say it, the FIA.
 
Possibly so, but Boris was out there on his own and he had no recourse if he stuffed up - on the other hand, MS relied heavily on his 'team', his position within that team and, dare I say it, the FIA.

A position within his teams (Benetton too) that he earned through his searing driving ability, and then - yes - exploited. He didn't impose his structure on an unwilling Maranello - they were crying out for it. If you don't like the way Ferrari was structured, I think that's a lot more to do with Todt and, to a lesser extent, di Montezemolo.
 
Back
Top Bottom