No offence taken I just stand by my view that Schuey would not have come back unless it was to win. For Mercedes it was hugely attractive, but I wonder if it has had the reverse effect bearing in mind the poor results they have had? Who do people blame for the poor results? Mercedes or Schuey? It has to be Mercedes as Rosberg isn't at the front either and everyone knows Schuey isn;t exactly a slow coach.
Well we are getting massively into ifs and buts now, and it comes down to opinion I guess. As I recall (so probably 180 degrees opposite of the truth) one of the reasons Hamilton was beating alonso in the pre hungary period was that he was using alonso's set ups and doing a better job with them. After spygate fallout alonso wouldn't let hamilton have his set up data, so hamilton started having to learn how to set his own car up himself and it took a while to get the knack of so alonso started to draw a bit level with him. So If there was no spygate fall out then he would probably have had alonso's set ups all year and outscored him. hahaha how many ifs and buts are there now eh, anyway I think that is probably how it would have gone.
I know F1 strategists are having a really hard time judging Merc's performance this year. Only Renault have been close to them this year, but both teams have somewhat unknown quantities in terms of driving talent (or at least the level the drivers are performing at). The only positive from this perspective is that Merc aren't changing drivers, so that's a factor the teams around them don't have to worry about...
I also recall something about Alonso ceasing to share data with Hamilton, but I don't recall whether that was in response to Hungary or not (you'd think that McLaren would have been able to force them to share once the fallout had happened and they didn't have to worry about upsetting Fernando?). You have to think though that even if McLaren and Alonso were getting on fine - at some point near the end of the season, he would have said, "I'm not prepared to accept the risk of Hamilton beating me when I'm doing all the work" and stopped sharing data anyway... I know I would in that situation.
Yes, I agree Sea-man. Threads such as these are always a matter of opinion, although the author seems to want to celebrate his own opinion only, rather than accept some of the debate it provokes. I'm surprised at you Forza. I always thought jumping on someone else's bandwagon was beneath you? I mean this sincerely and without malice. Whilst I would not describe myself as a fan of Senna, Miggs; I think you are right about Schumacher. I'm pleased you are thrilled by him EMSC. It is obvious that his presence is the major reason you watch F1; but if this helps promote motor-sport, I am pleased that you will remain a fan, at least until something else (perhaps) "makes Formula 1" for you. You make some good points here Kickass. It's nice to see that some Schumacher 'believers' can also be reasonable.
He was already beating an alive Senna, so it wouldn't have been much different. Senna was past his best.
i certainly dont take anything on here personal cosy ,been round the block far too many times for that , my topic and opinions are certainly not cast in stone and welcome healthy disagreement on those opinions , also fully appreciate that schumacher was not everybodys flavour of the month so i expected divided opinions , just found it unusual that you found most of my specific points in my topic " nonsense" but did not offer any other specific points or opinions as to why you did not agree ---- no matter -
didn't Benetton cheat in the first race, altering their fuel rig so Schumacher could overtake Senna in the pit?
Kyle's right. Anyway, Senna was overrated. Prost beat him in '89 and if modern rules were applied today would have beat him in '88 as well.
How was Schumacher already beating Senna? And how was Senna past his best? Senna himself said that he had not peaked yet and envisioned himself driving until he was 40. You drive to the rules of the day. In '89 Prost beat Senna off track, not on it.
you need to get hold of the 89 season sami , senna gave prost a one sided lesson that year , so much so prost ran away from senna to ferrari for 1990 , he even toyed with prost at monaco 1989 for 19 laps before driving away from alain at a second a lap thereafter , sections of the press slated senna for being so unsporting for his actions that race , in reality the 7 times alain and senna finished a race together with healthy cars senna beat him every time , it was pure domination by senna over alain all season , as it turned out electrical and mechanical unreliability proved to be senna"s undoing that year --
The '07 season is why Moss never won a title... FACT! As for 1989... Balestre decided the championship winner that season. As for people trying to apply points retrospectively... stop! That wasn't how a title was at that time. You could change the point system to anything you wish and make anybody a champion that way.
Prost cheated in '89. It was Prost that schumacher learned his ram them off to steal the title tactic from, and the FIA gave them carte blanche to do it after that race. The decision of the FIA to take away Senna's win and give the title to Prost was one of the worst decisions I've seen in F1. A lot diminished in my eyes that day, but nothing more than the respect I'd had for my hero.
You offered an opinion based on your own feelings. Your "specific points" were simply opinion, some of which I simply disagreed with; none of which needs to be justified any more than the statements you made require to be justified by yourself. I am not asking you to justify your statements am I? I simply regard some of your points (which are nothing but opinion) as nonsense. It is a simple disagreement of opinion; nothing personal and nothing to get worked up about. If I say "Jim Clark is the best driver who has ever driven a car", I do not mind if you disagree; or if you regard my opinion as nonsense! Indeed, sooner or later, such disagreement is very likely in a forum and I certainly would not take it personally! If you make absolute and categorical statements which are nothing but opinion, you should expect that sooner or later, someone may refute your hypotheses with similar logic.
7x WDC... Like him or not, that's bloody incredible. People say he cheated, some say he had the best car, some say he had no competition, but then go on to say that Montoya was incredible and Button is now the best thing since sliced bread and still claim that Hakkinen was the dogs balls. None of it washes. You don't have a career that long and that incredible just out of luck or just because everybody wanted to cheat to make you win, because everybody in the 15 years or so that you were driving happened to be crap... or because the governing body thought that the general population would love to see such dominance. Maybe he was just that good, made everybody else look ordinary and you were lucky enough to see a legend in the sport. I'll be telling my grand-kids about Schumacher!
be sure to state the other opinions - that he was a cheat par excellance, usually had the best car, the manufacturer team cheated, the FIA fixed things, the rules got changed or ignored. A worthy champ for a few of them - but not many.
This sums up my feelings entirely, also he worked harder than anybody else at the time and deserved his rewards.
Of course If Schumacher had never retired then he wouldn't have lost as much form as he did - there is the testing ban so he would have lost some of his advantage but he would have been far better than he was in 2010/this year and he would have had the 2010 ferrari which Alonso took into the last race leading the championship so that would have been another potentail championship as well. Especially considering that I believe Schumacher already had some experience of F1 without refueling.
