No doubt Nico is fast, constant and makes few mistakes. One thing I haven't personally seen in him is passion, the spark that attracts your attention to someone among a number of more or less equal. Michael had this spark as soon as he appeared on the grid.
There's even controversy of different magnitude accompanying every champion. For that matter I saw the same spark in Lewis, but it seems he couldn't stand up to the challenge, maybe because of the bordering with hysteria publicity he got from the media and fan base.

Out of interest, over the past season can you (or anyone on-thread) recall any particular examples of his lack of racecraft?

Can't give you 1 particular example from the top of my head but to me it seems that sometimes he loses a position a little to easily or he just can't make that 1 pass that would open up his race.
Might be perception though.

umm... Singapore 2009? China 2010?

OK, back to the topic. Nico have his own thread.

I have no clue what I am talking about.....hmmmm. Ok Mr. Expert let me explain myself yet again. If you had read my post you would have seen that I said that yes his stats are the best, but that does not necessarily make him the greatest of all time. I said that you cannot compare different eras. I never said that I didn't like stats.

It chuffs me when people like you get on their soapbox and claim to be the "know it alls" of the sport and when someone posts a contradictory opinion he is evasive, doesn't have a clue what he is talking about, and prefers empty arguements......

Why don't you join the rest of us mortals and come down from your lofty heights.....

I think Mika Hakkinen would disagree with you........

I would say that (talking about the past season) this is more to do with the position Merc found themselves in. A second behind the top 3 and a second in front of the 5th team. In this situation the merc of Rosberg was out of position a fair bit trying to leapfrog the others, or trying different strategies. In comparison with Michael (who found himself way back where he shouldn't have been) Rosberg didn't get in many tangles and often took the smart option of relinquishing his position i.e. at Spa since fighting would have lost him more time.

We need to see both drivers back in a car that's very close to others in the field to really judge their racecraft now.

A smart ass remark deserves a smart ass remark in kind.....I never said that I knew more than you people did....How many times do I need to say that Schumacher's stats are the best but that does not necessarily make him the greatest driver of all time.....different eras cannot be compared....that's what I was saying.....get it?

You should have put 'Owned' at the end of your post lol

Seriously though, saying to Schumacher fans that you don't consider him the greatest of all time is a fruitless task. You always get responses like "but he's a 7 x WDC", or "look at the stats" lol. Its not about championships and race wins in my book, its about style, passion and how other drivers look up to them IMO. Schumacher is up there amongst the greatest but he doesn't hold the top spot in my view. He is technically the best there has ever been though but when you say that people view greatest and best as the same thing which it isn't.

The whole idea of crowning one driver as 'the greatest of all time' is flawed. The sport changes, the requirements change. It's a lot like trying to crown the best football player of all time - daft and impossible to quantify.

Not to beat the dead horse, first of all I have never claimed to be an expert, but people like you get under my skin because first you disregard racing statistics for whatever reasons, and then continue with a claim that Schumacher is not the greatest driver, a statement which remains unexplained, thus an opinion only. When invited to explain it, you have told me to study history. Well, Mr. History, had you study it, you would have known that it offers no answers to such foolish statements with any definite conviction. You are entitled to any opinion you want, but stop lecturing us about it.

Best statistically and greatest are the same, look up a dictionary, it's a book with a lot of words.

Different era's can be easily compared.

You still fail to put any argument up in defense of your position but continue to take the position that you are right - look up pompous while looking up greatest..

You see Spa08, handel, jj2728, etc. - above is a post with reasoning, eloquence and intelligence.

The opinion is wrong but still a good post!

What is it with you people.....does Schumacher have you on his payroll?
What type of defense would you like me to put up?
You fail to see the point that I am making that the best stats do not necessarily contibute to being the greatest of all time...and you say that different eras can be compared? By stats yes, but that does not make him the greatest ever in my book.....
You call me pompous and imply that I don't know what a dictionary is.......
You sir, are full of it........and very full of yourself.......

I suppose your opinion is right

Another fool on the Schumacher payroll.....
You must be very insecure to say that I have been lecturing you.....
As far as beating a dead horse.....
I have repeatedly said that his stats are the best but that does not necessarily mean that he is the greatest because different eras cannot be compared. With stats, yes but in my book stats alone do not make him the greatest.
Can you understand that now? Were the words I used small enough and mono-sybillic enough for you?
Have I made it simple enough now?

When it comes to Schumacher most of you don't know what reasoning, eloquence and intelligence are......

Agreed, its ridiculous. After many many years of watching them all drive I still couldn't tell you who I thought was the 'best' or most complete driver between Senna, Prost and Schumacher. Whats the point to even try? They were all superb and better than nearly all of their peers.

You can still have your 'favourite' for whatever reason of course, but trying to determine who was the best? I'm not even sure what the question means - fastest over a lap, best at setup, best all rounder? Its meaningless.

JJ we don't care who is the greatest in your books! It is OT. He is in our books, and that is what matters for us. And he is greatest in other peoples book too. We get it about your books. Can you stop repeating yourself? You have to accept this(that we think he is the best) and move on.

Yeah, I get that. It must really get under your collective skins when someone does not worship at his knee caps like many of you do.
And as far as repeating one's self, well I'd say that a majority of you once again do the same on a regular basis and so I'll just say...
pot.....kettle....black.....

I was lucky enough to see his era from his very first race up until this present day. I have big respect for the guy and at his peak his driving was clinical, consistent, and ruthless. Mesmerizing to watch infact. He is one of the greats the sport has ever seen, but on personal level I have to say he isn't who I hold that mantle for. Statistically he is the best until his records are beaten which may not occur for many, many years, but the word 'great' holds a different meaning to me than 'best'. I'm sure Michael is happy with his records and has total career satisfaction. He himself admits he doesn't consider himself as the greatest and I don't feel he is just doing that out of modesty. The BBC did an interesting segment a couple of years ago where every driver was asked who the 'greatest' was. It was interesting to hear their views and shows how different people look up to the greats.

1. NO. Read my last post again. First sentence.
2. Nobody wants to change you.
3. I don't go to the other drivers threads to tell there, that the topic guy is not the best as majority of them think. This is the difference between me and you, I don't force my opinion.

No, this is funny.

Mika had the speed; he always did; as we saw in 1993 and 1994. Nico does not have that kind of speed.

The McLaren was the better car from 1998-2000, I am sure he would agree with that. For 2000, it was on par with Ferrari, remember Ferrari had issues with their car in the summer of 2000. As for as competeting with vintage Schumacher, which he did very well.... But Schu was clearly the better driver overall, I don't think anyone disputes that for those seasons; look at some of the wonderful drives he put on.

The 'greatest' will always be a matter of subjective opinion, though most of us would draw up a pretty similar top 10. I'm a huge fan of (the old) Michael, but there's no way I can be certain he's better than Lang, Rosemeyer, Fangio, Clark, etc - or even Senna, Prost and Co. What I do know, as TifosiMac says, is that he was little short of mesmerizing from around 1992-2002, and only someone too young to remember or wilfully obtuse would claim he was an average driver in hyper cars.

On the subject of Mika, he's the only guy from 94-04 that I felt could match Michael over a single lap; some of their turn-taking qualifying duels were absolutely epic.

And how do you know he hasn't, put it this way if he was in a top car he'd be well worth a bet in my eyes

Actually that's pretty funny, almost child like.
You don't go over to the other drivers' threads to say that so and so is not the best.....what do you think this is, a juniors' schoolyard?
I am not forcing any opinion on anyone I am merely stating MHO and why I think it is so, but some of you are so blind in your allegiance to Schumacher that reasoning, eloquence and intelligence go right out the window....

Obviously it's very difficult to draw meaningful comparisons between athletes that competed in different eras. Thus we have those that tout Fangio, Clark, Ayrton, et al.

Schumacher's statistics are of such a magnitude that there is nothing to compare them to. I doubt if any driver will ever top the 91 wins and 7 wdcs he accumulated in his "first career". I can understand that this gets stuck in the craws of those that don't like him. The numbers are there, they are undeniable, and no one has ever come anywhere near matching them.

Is not the greatest track and field star the one who runs the fastest, jumps the highest, and wins all the medals and titles? Is not the same true for any other endeavor? It's no different here either. If anyone has claim to the title of the greatest racing driver ever, it is Michael Schumacher.

Different eras, different:

- Types of machinery
- Amounts of races
- Financial climate (stability, driver loyalty)
- Technological climate (ability for one team to stay ahead)
- Competition

Comparing eras with any degree of accuracy is therefore impossible since there are NO constants. This is the single defining principle of scientific investigation and therefore surely pretty central to any statistical analysis. The examples you give do have constants given their lack of complexity - i.e. running, jumping and can by all means be compared.

I'm not arguing that someone other than MS could be given this 'greatest driver' crown. I'm saying that even using it as a term is banal, trivial, utterly pointless affair the like of which should be reserved for shoddy tabloid journalism, children & the writing team for Top Gear.

So,anyone who won't accept your vision/opinion is blind, not intelligent, not reasonable. Tell me about it not forcing opinion.

Nope, you are wrong. I never stated that anyone had to accept anything I voice an opinion on.
Did you not read my prior post?
I guess it all ties in with the blind allegiance stuff, you read and interpret what suits your views.....

That in essence is what I have been trying to say, but as usual, well....... you can gauge by the responses I am met with how well it goes over in some circles here...

I would like to chime in and say your views (along with other people's dismissal of them as bunk for the most part) are very welcome here. You might want to consider whether a less supercilious tone would generate a more friendly conversation with the general forum community however, assuming you wish for a positive and friendly discussion that is.

Back on topic, calling Rosberg mediocre is ridiculous, and seems to mostly be aimed at Michael rather than being a thought out opinion, as he placed a poor Williams in excellent grid positions it never deserved on numerous occasions and has never failed to extract the apparent maximum from his car in qualifying at any team. He seems to lack SOMETHING over a two hour in comparison to a Mika or a Michael, something in the head. I can't really back that up though.

I wont go near 'greatest ever' waffle, it has always been silly.

Yes, I always believed Mika could be faster than Michael on the single lap. No doubt he was on his day (1998-2000 seasons).

Thanks, but I'm a big boy and can handle this crowd. And to be quite frank I like the idea of being supercilious, has a nice ring to it. You see, I post an opinion of mine and almost immediately am jumped upon. and why? Because it is contradictory to the rampant hero worship of Schumacher that goes on here.....I'm forcing, as they say, my opinons on them, I am pompous, to some I can't read, don't know what a dictionary is, am neither eloquent, nor reasonable.......oh my.
And all because I have said that Schumacher's stats are the best, but IMHO I do not think that he is the greatest driver ever as one cannot compare different eras...
Funny thing is, I've met him a couple of times and he was most pleasant, doesn't change my opinion of whether he's the greatest or not though.......

You seem quite unaware of the reason you are being 'jumped on'.

Of course you can hold whatever opinion you want. The reason you are getting into 'arguments' about your 'opinion' is that your tone is downright rude and condascending.

As an example - I agree it is silly to hold one driver up as the 'greatest'. I couldn't tell you who was better between Jim Clark or Senna or Schumi or Prost etc etc and wouldn't bother to try. I also think Rosberg is a mighty fine driver who has shaded Schumi these past 2 years in terms of performance.

The responses you have made to my posts in the past say everything about your attitude, so you don't fool me with this 'oh its only because no Schumacher fan on here is reasonable' BS. Buttercup.

I share the same view and keep saying it from time to time, but few pay attention.
Although I am a devoted MS fan I'd never declare him the greatest of all times. But not for the flawed reasons most people here give. Simply there are many great drivers and every one has made his achievements in different periods of time and under different conditions. The common between them is that they have managed to be the best under those circumstances and used their opportunities to the max.

As far as being unaware.....hardly......
You don't like my attitude? Then don't respond.....simple as that. Or put me on your ignore list as so many are want to do....

At last a voice of a reason. I have always maintained that it is not only counterproductive to compare drivers of different era, and if (for fun) you want to do it, statistics is the only yardstick that is left then. I would not want to depend on archived articles from hostile, nationalistic websites or similar sources. I also view as disrespectful for someone to say to Schumacher, just as to any other driver - you not the greatest, without actualy also explaining on what basis one can make a such claim. It makes sense to me that if you say it, than you can also explain it, and if not, than you are simply trolling.

I don't agree that statistics are the only yardstick you can judge with. I would agree that it is difficult to say one driver is the greatest over the other because the era's have been so different. You could argue that Schumacher never faced the type of competition we saw in the 80's or like in the present day. You could also say that regardless of that he still would have been the best, but their are elements of doubt on both sides. I think when debating we need to accept that others have different opinions and we all have drivers we have looked up to and admired their talents. Saying you consider Schumacher to be the best there has been based on his achievements, but not the greatest in terms of overall package is not a daft thing to say and shouldn't be greeted with the accusation of trolling IMO.

Well here you go again - how you can claim that drivers who drove alonside Schumacher were lesser drivers than those who raced after or before his (first) carreer was launched? On what basis you make that claim other than your subjective opinion? BTW, I am old enough to remember my time at the track to see Michael racing with Senna and Prost, and I am satisfied with his top level driving.

How can you claim he did have equally strong opponents during time, is also a reasonable question? What I have said IS my opinion, and I am not passing it off as fact or anything like that. Why can't you accept my view?

I like yourself am old enough to remember Schumacher racing against Senna and Prost and I also witnessed it live at the track. Does that make my opinion any better than anyone elses? No it doesn't but I'm entitled to my opinion.

What competition you see in 2011? I didn't see any. It was walk in the park.

Very true. I suppose if the car is the best by a clear margin all the competition in the world won't stop you winning championships.

Out of interest, for you Schumi fans what are your opinions on the Rascasse '06 incident and did it change your affection/feelings for Schumacher in anyway whatsoever?

To answer your question - No, and anyone who thinks he would have managed the situation differently is playing Monday morning quarterback. Situation unfolds differently in an armchair looking backwards, the same on the pitwall, and when you are in the car, making split second decisions. Some journalists simply live in destruction, scorch land mode for majority of their lives, so it seems.

no

No, not at all. He's still the same schumi for me.