Will SchM succeed in his comeback?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzeidzei

Dunno if there are stats ready anywhere, but I dont think MSc has lost many times in quali to his teammate? Does anyone know any better? I think Rubens beat him but only once or twice.

However, Schumi has lost to Nico every time! :)

---

According to Autosport, MS has only suffered total defeat (ie all free practise, qualifying and race) once before in his career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I think Schuey has already succeeded in making a return at 41. Not many drivers of this age would be desirable at such a late age in a top team.. :)

---

There, devoid of derogatory nicknames or bluster, is by far the most sensible post in this entire thread. What more is there to say on the subject?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F1boat

Well, no need to be aggressive, but yes, I think that statistics prove it. I also have witnessed how the guy drives and in my opinion he is the best ever. I always had the feeling that he is outdoing his car - in the years when he lost to Williams and McLaren, in the years he dominated in Ferrari, always. I was never ever calm when he was against the drivers I supported and I was confident that he can do magic in the times I supported him. Maybe other people felt that way about other drivers in the years before Michael. These things are subjective. But for me, he is the best and the stats IMO are not hurting my opinion either.
And if he really loses to Rosberg this year, which I very much doubt, I think that it will be only because of age - this will prove once and for all the comebacks can never be truly successful. But I believe and hope that he will do his magic again and will beat Rosberg.

---

I may not like the guy or his tactics, but there is no disputing that to me he is the greatest F1 driver. His statistics are not just numbers, they are staggering. Yeah he had some dominant cars, but so did other great champs. No matter what one thinks of him, he was and is a superb driver with that unique quality of getting more out of a car than what seems possible.There are huge character flaws and blemishes in his career as well as some cars that i thought were wavering on legality and some other situations that confirmed the worst of the FIArrari pact, but still, it's really no contest IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

I may not like the guy or his tactics, but there is no disputing that to me he is the greatest F1 driver. His statistics are not just numbers, they are staggering. Yeah he had some dominant cars, but so did other great champs. No matter what one thinks of him, he was and is a superb driver with that unique quality of getting more out of a car than what seems possible.There are huge character flaws and blemishes in his career as well as some cars that i thought were wavering on legality and some other situations that confirmed the worst of the FIArrari pact, but still, it's really no contest IMO

---

Respect for that post, pal.

I don´t doubt he´s great. Saying he´s decent was more of a joke than anything else. However since it´s kind of difficult to compare drivers from different ages (actually it´s not easy to compare the drivers from the same age since it´s pretty difficult to asses how much of one´s performance is due to his equipment) I really resent the use of absolute terms like "the greatest"... I can understand that a group of drivers are "the greatest" but to single out just one out of so many... it doesn´t sound right. I have nothing against the driver with the best "stats"... that would be absolutely correct. I´m convinced that Rosberg would have a much tougher time against the 2004 Schumacher. I´m also convinced that he had it easier than others and that why his stats look so so so good.

When a name is that big, the burden is so heavy that people just can't wait for a couple of grands prix to have a final jugdment on his comeback... :) I'm not a Schumi fanatic, but he's really in great shape after a three year break. We should look at Fisichella and Badoer in last year's Ferrari.. We should look at Lauda's and Mansell's first races after their comebacks considering their teammates ... Being consistent and comfortable with the car is awfully harder than it seems on TV :)

Some people around me reached the following conclusion after the Bahrain GP: Hamilton is faster than Alonso, Alonso is much more faster than Schumi ever was compared to Massa. So Hamilton is faster than Schumi ever was.... Can u believe that? Is it that simple for f**k's sake?? :dozey:


I think he might win a couple of GPs this year but unless Ross Brawn takes something special out of the bag, it's Alonso's or Vettel's year.( Mc Laren and Lewis worry me, though) The real target is 2011 methinks.... If he outcores Nico at the end of 2010, he will have done the job.. The rest depends on the car and the team.. No one can blame him if he can't be world champion this year...

What saddens me is that the majority of the people with the exception of the real F1 viewers only look at the results completely ignoring the parameters leading to them..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

I may not like the guy or his tactics, but there is no disputing that to me he is the greatest F1 driver. His statistics are not just numbers, they are staggering. Yeah he had some dominant cars, but so did other great champs. No matter what one thinks of him, he was and is a superb driver with that unique quality of getting more out of a car than what seems possible.There are huge character flaws and blemishes in his career as well as some cars that i thought were wavering on legality and some other situations that confirmed the worst of the FIArrari pact, but still, it's really no contest IMO

---

while his statistics are staggering and there is no denying that statiscally he is the best.

however i have always disliked his lack of sportmanship, his reluctancy to take on worthy drivers as teammates and the neverending doubts about the legality of some cars he drove to the championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratonmacias

while his statistics are staggering and there is no denying that statiscally he is the best.

however i have always disliked his lack of sportmanship, his reluctancy to take on worthy drivers as teammates and the neverending doubts about the legality of some cars he drove to the championship.

---

MS' problem is that all his team mates became unworthy drivers after a season alongside him. Just adds to his impressive achievements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratonmacias

while his statistics are staggering and there is no denying that statiscally he is the best.

however i have always disliked his lack of sportmanship, his reluctancy to take on worthy drivers as teammates and the neverending doubts about the legality of some cars he drove to the championship.

---

This has little to do with his amazing ability. Many great drivers will do many things to win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

MS' problem is that all his team mates became unworthy drivers after a season alongside him. Just adds to his impressive achievements.

---

What a depressing commentary on the modern F1 'fan'. Can anyone imagine an F1 enthusiast of the 1950s suggesting that one of Fangio's positive qualities was his ability to make his team-mates look inferior?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

What a depressing commentary on the modern F1 'fan'. Can anyone imagine an F1 enthusiast of the 1950s suggesting that one of Fangio's positive qualities was his ability to make his team-mates look inferior?

---

Well, yeah!! if they had consistently been told they were #2 and instructed to "move over", they would also have looked inferior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F1boat

This has little to do with his amazing ability. Many great drivers will do many things to win.

---

actually it does as his "amazing ability" was boosted by poor drivers in the second seat of the team.

had he done the same with hill villeneuve hakkinen alonso or raikkonen then there would be no denial of his superiority. as it stands to me he is not the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratonmacias

actually it does as his "amazing ability" was boosted by poor drivers in the second seat of the team.

had he done the same with hill villeneuve hakkinen alonso or raikkonen then there would be no denial of his superiority. as it stands to me he is not the best.

---

:eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratonmacias

actually it does as his "amazing ability" was boosted by poor drivers in the second seat of the team.

had he done the same with hill villeneuve hakkinen alonso or raikkonen then there would be no denial of his superiority. as it stands to me he is not the best.

---

How do you know that the drivers you mention were not offered a seat along MS and turned it down knowing they will lose in a direct battle?
You just look to your side of the story and post rubbish you can't substantiate.

What is sure is that at 41 MS is still out there racing in a top team and I understand that it bothers you when you think that JV has to be happy with his guitar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Schuey has never found himself in a competitive team paired with a teammate that is strong enough to truly challenge his wonderful talent.

---

Nor should he.

It is only internet critics who give a toss about it.

Common sense says there is no point having a team-mate capable of challenging as it just makes the job harder.

The job, by the way, is to win. There are no degrees of victory.

Michael was in a position to recieve outright No1 status and only a fool would not have taken that opportunity if they were offered it.

No other driver would have turned it down had they been good enough to have been made the offer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Nor should he.

It is only internet critics who give a toss about it.

Common sense says there is no point having a team-mate capable of challenging as it just makes the job harder.

The job, by the way, is to win. There are no degrees of victory.

Michael was in a position to receive outright No1 status and only a fool would not have taken that opportunity if they were offered it.

No other driver would have turned it down had they been good enough to have been made the offer.

---

I don't think anyone can argue against that. My only uncertainty here is whether SchM was offered the #1 spot or whether he insisted on the #1 spot at Ferrari. But the number of wins for both is proof that it worked.

as for the thread's question, it depends on your view of success. if by success you expect the sort of results and performances from before, i say no, he will not succeed.

however if you think being competitive would be a mark of success for his comeback (which i do) then yes, he already has been successful. he may fight for a few wins, if the car is up to it.

for me the comeback is already a success, even if he appears to have lost a little (and i mean a little) of the old magic, to be competitive amongst the current crop is better than most new drivers manage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

It certainly worked and from a business point of view it makes sense to adopt this stance with one strong driver. Seeing the way teams of late are hiring drivers on an equal basis, I do think it offers more excitement to the proceedings and allows drivers to measure themselves against a competitive teammate. That has proved to be at the expense of a world championship in Mclarens case however, but I still welcome this method as a fan... :)

---

Thinking about this quite seriously, let's look at this from a totally different perspective. Just suppose that the FIA has not "outlawed" team tactics, and we are running a team which is as good as the other top two teams, but we have just hired a new sensational driver called, for argument sake, Gary Ablett. This guy Gary is really good and can drive at least .2 seconds faster around any track than anyone else. Now we hear there is another reasonably good driver called Cameron Ling who is desperate to get into a good team. Now we know that if we can have full support from Cameron for Gary, then we will win the premiership. So we ask Cameron if he will drive his races to support Gary, to help him win if at all possible, and he agrees.

And we win both premierships. So! what's wrong with that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

It is only internet critics who give a toss about it.

---

I don't disagree with any of your points here. But maybe you should be reminded that you yourself are also, in posting on here on various subjects, nothing more than an 'internet critic' either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I like to see the "Jenson vs Lewis" and ............. battles ......... :)

---

Just as a matter of interest, what makes you think there will be any Bunsen vs Hamilton battles? :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

How do you know that the drivers you mention were not offered a seat along MS and turned it down knowing they will lose in a direct battle?
You just look to your side of the story and post rubbish you can't substantiate.

What is sure is that at 41 MS is still out there racing in a top team and I understand that it bothers you when you think that JV has to be happy with his guitar.

---

Brutal, but correct.

So, who were MS' teammates at Ferrari?

Eddie Irvine - a hot prospect at the time when Todt hired him, he was getting solid results (podium placing) with Jordan in '95 and went on to fight for the championship against the so much hailed Hakkinen in 1999.

Rubens Barrichello - he was also a hot prospect at the time he was hired, before switching to Ferrari he's got podium finishes and a pole positions while driving for Jordan and Stewart Ford.

Felipe Massa - most of you already know how fast and strong of a driver he is.

I fail to see who should have Ferrari hired instead of Irvine and Barrichello?
Hakkinen was a nobody in '95, Coulthard also, Hill was an aged test driver, Frentzen went on to become nothing, Berger and Alesi had just been changed from Ferrari.

Let's face it, Irvine and Barrichello were as good as anyone would have found on the grid at that moment. Anyway,people around here make some outlandish and unsubstantiated claims without even thinking about what they claim, just for the sake of bashing the driver and team who destroyed their favorites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

It just goes to show that the era we are seeing now and the talent on grid is vastly different to the mid to late 90's. Schuey was a vastly superior driver in that period and its a pity for the sake of arguement, that we are unable to see him measured against a grid like today when he was in his prime.

---

We don't even know if the current grid is better than the one MS was up against in his prime. All we know is that the level of the grid nowadays is more even because none of them stands out like MS did back then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I don't see anything to suggest that the likes of Vettel, Alonso, and Hamilton are inferior to a 25 year old Michael Schumacher.

---

Well, if old man Schumacher can take on and beat these drivers who are in their prime, I think that means that prime time Schumacher was better than these drivers are.

If...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

We don't even know if the current grid is better than the one MS was up against in his prime. All we know is that the level of the grid nowadays is more even because none of them stands out like MS did back then.

---

I have to agree. In my opinion Michael was very special and that's why other competent drivers like Barrichello, R Schumacher, Montoya or Coulthard couldn't win a championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Very true in that instance, but I wouldn't put the likes of Barrichello, R Schumacher and certainly not Coulthard on the same plateau as Vettel, Hamilton and Alonso.. :)

---

I wouldn't place Vettel or Hamilton in the same league as Alonso either. He has no weaknesses and is team LEADER along the lines of Schumi as opposed to being capable of number 1 status as the other two you have mentioned.

Evidence the Japanese Grand Prix of 2008 for example. Hamilton relies on his team and obeys.

At this stage I would not put Schumacher at the same level as Alonso - no other driver in fact.

If Ferrari maintain a rate of development equal to other teams then as teh season matures, Alonso is going to become stronger.

At this stage, aside from mechanical failure, even though it is early in the season, I reckon Alonso is on the way to his third title.

Schumacher will also become stronger - in my view, Schumi once up to strength is going to take care of everyone except Alonso in his stride by mid-season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'd love to know what you think you see when you watch a grand prix. Its almost as though the last 3 years do not exist. Alonso has not shown the superiority over the likes of Vettel and particularly Hamilton to which you claim here.

---

Quite. Whilst Alonso is IMO extremely strong his performance both in and out of the car against Hamilton 2007 did not show any sign of superiority as an overall package, surprising given it was Lewis' first season.

There is no evidence to suggest that Alonso is in a league of his own. He is merely one amongst a group of top drivers that includes Vettel, Hamilton and hopefully a rejuvenated Schumi.

We're lucky that we're being treated to a fourway battle that includes such a wide breadth of talent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'd love to know what you think you see when you watch a grand prix. Its almost as though the last 3 years do not exist. Alonso has not shown the superiority over the likes of Vettel and particularly Hamilton to which you claim here.

---

Funny. It looks like you haven´t been paying too much attention during the last 3 years either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'd love to know what you think you see when you watch a grand prix. Its almost as though the last 3 years do not exist. Alonso has not shown the superiority over the likes of Vettel and particularly Hamilton to which you claim here.

---

He has not?

His victory at Suzuka in 2008 was a masterpiece. Neither Vettel nor Hamilton have managed a victory like that. Hamilton takes instructions from his team - he does not comand his position as does Alonso. I rate it as his greatest victory ever demonstrating as a driver his enormous capacity and leadership.

I suspect that in Bahrain Vettel did not pace himself well and Alonso, who caught up to him, was managing for the last 12 laps - in the end he did not have to and won far ahead of everyone else.

Alonso beat Schumacher and managed consecutive championship wins. This changed the game for Ferrari. Di Montezemolo pushed Schumacher out and hired Raikonnen because he lost confidence in Schumacher. He reckoned Michael should have won in 2006. It began the schism that led to Todt leaving.

This is why I consider Alonso superior. He is not only quick but he is a game changer and the last driver to command that respect was Schumacher.

This is why I think that Fernando will claim his third title in 2010 if the Ferrari remains competitive. All the other drivers, except Schumacher are not gamechangers.

Of course they are excellent drivers but not in the same league as the Spaniard. Hamilton even mentioned how he doubted himself during the difficulties in 2009. Alonso even during the most difficult and frustrating times at Renaul in 2008 and 2009 remained resolute about himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan H

We're lucky that we're being treated to a fourway battle that includes such a wide breadth of talent.

---

Fourway?

A week ago it looked pretty much two-way to me - Red Bull and Ferrari.
Well ONE Red Bull at least!

Maybe Albert Park will see a stronger Mclaren and Mercedes. Woking seems to think that the track will suit it better and both Jenson and Lewis [there is a store in Manhattan at 16th and &th if I recall called: "Jensen - Lewis"!!!!] know how go quickly and to win there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

He has not?

His victory at Suzuka in 2008 was a masterpiece. Neither Vettel nor Hamilton have managed a victory like that. Hamilton takes instructions from his team - he does not comand his position as does Alonso. I rate it as his greatest victory ever demonstrating as a driver his enormous capacity and leadership.

I suspect that in Bahrain Vettel did not pace himself well and Alonso, who caught up to him, was managing for the last 12 laps - in the end he did not have to and won far ahead of everyone else.

Alonso beat Schumacher and managed consecutive championship wins. This changed the game for Ferrari. Di Montezemolo pushed Schumacher out and hired Raikonnen because he lost confidence in Schumacher. He reckoned Michael should have won in 2006. It began the schism that led to Todt leaving.

This is why I consider Alonso superior. He is not only quick but he is a game changer and the last driver to command that respect was Schumacher.

This is why I think that Fernando will claim his third title in 2010 if the Ferrari remains competitive. All the other drivers, except Schumacher are not gamechangers.

Of course they are excellent drivers but not in the same league as the Spaniard. Hamilton even mentioned how he doubted himself during the difficulties in 2009. Alonso even during the most difficult and frustrating times at Renaul in 2008 and 2009 remained resolute about himself.

---

Interesting that you skirt around the difficult subject of Alonso's behaviour in and out of the car during 2007. Gamechanger? Yes I agree, few drivers have been so perturbed by their teammates that they've decided to dob their team in to the FIA.

Has Alonso had great races in the past three years? Of course he has. As have Hamilton, Vettel and even that great underachiever Button. Does that mean he is superior to the first two? No. I do not understand why you think that not being a teamplayer is a plus point in the days when without the engineers giving the drivers constant guidance through the race the drivers would be left high and dry.

Being a fan of a driver is one thing. Letting that support alter your perception of reality is another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Fourway?

A week ago it looked pretty much two-way to me - Red Bull and Ferrari.
Well ONE Red Bull at least!

Maybe Albert Park will see a stronger Mclaren and Mercedes. Woking seems to think that the track will suit it better and both Jenson and Lewis [there is a store in Manhattan at 16th and &th if I recall called: "Jensen - Lewis"!!!!] know how go quickly and to win there.

---

SD, are you really a 'fan' of F1 or merely a troll?

Was Bahrain decided almost entirely by quali and a few technical/pitstop problems for the leaders or by overtaking?

'ONE Red Bull at least'? Hmmm interesting comment that suggests that you didn't see the clear problems cars had overtaking each other. Your supposed hero Alonso showed himself to be two seconds quicker than Vettel but only after he got into clear air after Sebastian's spark plug problems. Where did that two second advantage get him while he was behind Vettel? Absolutely nowhere.

Likewise Webber showed astounding pace whilst in clear air, yet for most of the race he was following others and unable to overtake, an indication not of his ability but of the current difficulty overtaking. One Red Bull? Webber isn't far off Vettel's pace, his quali performance in Bahrain notwithstanding. Anyone who had followed him over the past season or two would know that wouldn't they.

If you really are the long term F1 fan of great knowledge and understanding that you claim you are UP YOUR GAME. You patronise others and pretend to have inside knowledge yet your posts show unbelievable ignorance. I'm still laughing about your old post that claimed that Brawn was a direct descendant of Tyrrell, one of those 'facts' that differentiate those who know and those who don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan H

SD, are you really a 'fan' of F1 or merely a troll?

---

Don't ask ! :rolleyes: Don't ask! :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

He has not?

His victory at Suzuka in 2008 was a masterpiece. Neither Vettel nor Hamilton have managed a victory like that. Hamilton takes instructions from his team - he does not comand his position as does Alonso. I rate it as his greatest victory ever demonstrating as a driver his enormous capacity and leadership.

---

And in 2008 he came in 5th in the WDC. A single race alone does not make any driver. Heidfeld and Heikki both bested or equalled him in podium finishes in 2008. As for being such a leader, the "leader" should have dominated his much less experienced team mate in 2007, but did not.

In equal cars, the best he could do was match Lewis in points. And he had the advantage of the Ferrari information passed on from DeLaRosa that Lewis did not. Seems that Flavio realized Alonso needed such cheap advantages, and helped him with more scandal later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

He has not?

His victory at Suzuka in 2008 was a masterpiece. Neither Vettel nor Hamilton have managed a victory like that. Hamilton takes instructions from his team - he does not comand his position as does Alonso. I rate it as his greatest victory ever demonstrating as a driver his enormous capacity and leadership.

---

I agree. One of the best wins ever. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

He has not?

His victory at Suzuka in 2008 was a masterpiece.

---

You mean Fuji.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

He has not?

His victory at Suzuka in 2008 was a masterpiece. Neither Vettel nor Hamilton have managed a victory like that. Hamilton takes instructions from his team - he does not comand his position as does Alonso. I rate it as his greatest victory ever demonstrating as a driver his enormous capacity and leadership.

---

Is that the 2008 Fuji GP to which you refer? I think you are changing history to suit your own point Saint. That was the race, as I am sure we all recall, that Hamilton got a touch of the crazies and ploughed Kimi off the road at turn 1. Massa and Hamilton tooked each other out of the equation and the only remaining "top" car of the second McLaren retired. Without those incidents Alonso would have come home 4th - 3rd at best and no one would remember the pitstop call.

The difference between Lewis and Fred is that in poor cars one gave up and looked a shaddow of himself on the track, the other looked haunted out of the car but wrestled the beast round faster than it had any business managing. I'll leave you to figure out who is who.

ps As you a fond of quoting things drivers have said perhaps you can mull over the fact that Alonso himself has declared he is not the fastest driver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

And in 2008 he came in 5th in the WDC. A single race alone does not make any driver. Heidfeld and Heikki both bested or equalled him in podium finishes in 2008. As for being such a leader, the "leader" should have dominated his much less experienced team mate in 2007, but did not.

In equal cars, the best he could do was match Lewis in points. And he had the advantage of the Ferrari information passed on from DeLaRosa that Lewis did not. Seems that Flavio realized Alonso needed such cheap advantages, and helped him with more scandal later.

---

So so true... Besides that race I don't recall him achieving anything else. And even Heikki equaled him in the best car... how pathetic is that?

And 2007 he barely matched his team mate in points after having to compete against his own team while Dennis' favorite son actually managed to throw away his team's best chances to win something in a decade. Well, actually if you compare Alonso with a driver with such achievements he looks pathetic... even if his team would have sent him to race on a bicycle (they would have) if they could.

And it's a proven fact that McLaren was completely innocent in the spying scandal and that information circulated only between Ferrari, De La Rosa and Alonso. I can imagine Alonso working in his garage in the night with a hammer trying to copy somehow the Ferrari design.

and than for the sake of consensus I will accept your conviction that your biased opinion based on almost no facts at all is the absolute truth. He probably went himself to FB and told him: "Listen up buddy, I figured NP jr. no good has driven around with no purpose for too long now. We should have him crash so I could win the race. He would probably crash anyway but we should take an advantage from it by making him crash at an appropiate time." FB "But Fernando, how do we make him go along with this?" FA: "Well, we get some 10 points from this so that's like 15 races for him. Tell you'll let him drive around for some 15 more races" FB "And after that?" FA "After that you do whatever you want with him, I'll have signed with Ferrari by then, I don't care". If FA actually had anything to do with it I congratulate him for seeing NP jr no good true potential. That's the stroke of a genius.

Underrate Alonso all you want - he is still the most accomplished driver on the grid - aside from Schumacher.

He defeated Schumacher TWICE and is currently number one driver for Ferrari and leads the 2010 championship.

It is the peaks the quality of the peaks that one judges a driver and he commands from the cockpit which he did as an excellent example in Japan 2008 and in an inferior car.

A driver such as Hamilton obeys his team.

PS: he was placed NINTH as the alltime great in the driver survey undertaken by Autosport - aside from Schumacher - it makes him the best driver on the grid and in front of him were THE names of motor racing.

I thought Bunsen was the greatest driver on the grid. :confused: