Is Fernando Alonso for real?

[Ranger]

Anyway who thinks that a rookie could have won in the 4th or 5th best car on the grid???

Well the race the Benneton did win was an absolute fluke (Mansell ran out of fuel on the last lap whilst he had a 1-minute lead over Piquet) so no.

Having seen Kovalainen's and to a lesser extent Davidson's and Massa's results fresh after a year of testing I'm not sure a year of testing does anything for a driver in terms of what they will acheive on track, but rather, makes a driver more acquainted to the team and the team to the driver in Alonso's case.

Regardless this isn't too relevant as it's the championships that count.

[ioan]

Well the race the Benneton did win was an absolute fluke (Mansell ran out of fuel on the last lap whilst he had a 1-minute lead over Piquet) so no.

Having seen Kovalainen's and to a lesser extent Davidson's and Massa's results fresh after a year of testing I'm not sure a year of testing does anything for a driver in terms of what they will acheive on track, but rather, makes a driver more acquainted to the team and the team to the driver in Alonso's case.

Regardless this isn't too relevant as it's the championships that count.

One year of testing helps a lot in the development of a driver if taken seriously, and I think that Massa did a lot better after that testing year than before, just ask JV.

[raphael123]

I agree with Ioan here, a year of testing is definately beneficial to the driver. To say otherwise is naive. I suppose if you compare it to a year of actual racing, then a year of testing is not as beneficial, but a year of testing, or a year in GP2, I think it depends on your level of experience, but for Alonso, a year of testing at Renault was probably more useful. It's when you become a test driver for more than a season that things can become a bit stale. Look how long it took Davidson to get a drive, and even then it's with the Aguri's, and then Wurz, he's been out yonks it seems!

I definately think Alonso benefitted from being Renault's test driver, if only to prove himself to the team, and get to know the team well, before becoming a full works driver. However a season racing even with a lower team is more useful, as long as you have a deal with a big team at the end of the year.

[ioan]

I also mean that it helped FA in the comparison vs MS. Alonso was getting better while testing but the no of races was the same, when he came back to racing he was more experienced than before and could maximize the results in the races he run. ( example: when he run his 18th race MS had 1 year F1 experience, on the other side FA had 2 years of F1 experience at the moment he was driving his race no 18. you see what I mean?)

[raphael123]

Good point Ioan. The fact that after 90 races, Alonso also had a year's worth of experience as a test driver does mean Alonso was in a better position. Saying that, it also means while Alonso developed his skills in F1, he didn't have as much experience as Schumacher when he first came into F1, something Schumacher has always said was of great benefit to him. He use to say the more formula's and formats you race in, whether it be sports cars or single seaters was always great way to prepare yourself for F1.

Though obviously, it goes without saying Alonso had 3yrs in F1 plus a year testing before winning his first title. While Schumacher had 2 and a half years racing before he won his. Though obviously there are a lot of variables in each careers. Schumacher came good just as the last era of greats, Senna, Prost and Mansell finished their careers, and he was competing with an even less experienced driver for the 94 title - Hill, who was no comparison to Schumacher in terms of natural talent. Alonso has come along in a much tougher era, what with Schumacher who was still going strong till the end, in a weaker car, and with strong competition from the likes of Kimi etc

They are all factors to take into consideration about their careers and achievements so far. Though to be honest, I don't ever see Alonso being in F1 for as long as Schumacher was, and never beating his records, at least not the important ones.

[aryan]

I don't believe anyone can beat Schumacher's records in the forseeable future.

[putting on my anti-flame sheild]

Schumacher had enourmous talent, raw speed, and knew how to overtake. He also faced a weakning field -- he came when Senna, Prost and Mansell were gone -- Hill was no match for him and Mika was only good for 2-3 years. He had a team built around him, had dedicated second drivers prepared to give way to him, had very fast cars, in some years much faster than the second placed car, had TC before TC was allowed , had a dedicated tyre suuplier, and a host of other advantages (grin!!)

I don't think anyone else can come up and gather all these advantages in one package.

Now, let the flame wars begin!

[ioan]

He also faced a weakning field -- he came when Senna, Prost and Mansell were gone

That's bullsh!t, they were still there and he did beat them fair and square on the track when he was far from having their experience.

[raphael123]

I don't believe anyone can beat Schumacher's records in the forseeable future.

[putting on my anti-flame sheild]

Schumacher had enourmous talent, raw speed, and knew how to overtake. He also faced a weakning field -- he came when Senna, Prost and Mansell were gone -- Hill was no match for him and Mika was only good for 2-3 years. He had a team built around him, had dedicated second drivers prepared to give way to him, had very fast cars, in some years much faster than the second placed car, had TC before TC was allowed , had a dedicated tyre suuplier, and a host of other advantages (grin!!)

I don't think anyone else can come up and gather all these advantages in one package.

Now, let the flame wars begin!

I couldn't agree more to be honest. There's no doubting he was one of the greatest drivers. However the time he was in F1, and the different variables which can make or break a career, were all ideal for Schumacher!

Compare Prost, the guy closest to Schumi's record, had to race against the likes of Senna, Piquet, Mansel etc. Schumacher, up until 2005/6, had the likes of Hill, Villeneuve, Mika, and Coulthard. Apart from those 3 years where Mika was at his peak, the other's hardly put much fear when you see those coming up behind you.

Then as you point out, there was the team situation, which as I've pointed out in another topic, which was obviously there under Schumachers influence, hence both times he's left the teams he drove for, both have abolished the system the following season, seemingly suggesting they know it's unsporting. Then there's the 'Ferraristone', the FIA's 'helping hand' in some situations, the Adelaide 94, the TC on the car in 94, which the FIA could never prove it was used, even though it was on the car, there was the loophole of how you could have it on the car, as long as you never used it. Benettons of course claimed they never used it. Of course they didn't - they just wanted to make it look nice on the car

Still, Schumacher was a great driver, one of the greatest, if not unsporting and a liar.

[raphael123]

That's bullsh!t, they were still there and he did beat them fair and square on the track when he was far from having their experience.

Mmmm, Prost was not in F1 in 94, Senna only competed in 3 races, and Mansell completed 3 races at the end, mainly as a supporting role for Hill.

Sometimes I feel it's best to admit something even if it's not what you want to hear, because it's pointless denying the undeniable. It's a fact, that the greats of the 80's and early 90's were retiring, just as Schumacher was coming into his own, and Schumacher raced in an era where the quality of drivers was much weaker.

Prost had to race against the likes of Senna Mansell Piquet even Lauda right up until he retired! His entire career! Schumacher raced against them for 2 seasons when he wasn't in a car capable of challenging for the title, and the odd race in 94. Schumacher competition included Hill (3yrs), Villeneuve (2yrs), Mika (3yrs) and DC. It was only in his last 2 seasons where he had drivers who could be remotely considered in the same league as the likes of those drivers in the 80's. This obviously had an impact on what Schumacher achieved.

To try and claim Schumacher's era was as strong as that in the 80's and early 90's is pointless. Don't take it the wrong way, I don't think anyone is claiming Michael isn't a great. He definately is. I'm sure if he was racing in the 80's, he would have at least matched these drivers, and beaten them. But there's no way he would have the records he currently has. That doesn't take anything away from his obvious talent though

[ioan]

Mmmm, Prost was not in F1 in 94, Senna only competed in 3 races, and Mansell completed 3 races at the end, mainly as a supporting role for Hill.

They were there before in 91, 92 and 93 and the young MS did beat them with much less experience compared to those multiple WDCs.