Most of the comparisons in F1 are based on speculation, as the playing field is never equal - even within the same team the relative performances of the very same drivers vary because the cars are continuosly evolving prototypes that suit different drivers in a different manner. And of course the teams can treat their drivers very differently, which will affect the overall results.

Although practically everything in F1 is speculation, Jazza's post above makes the most sense about the situation at Ferrari in 96 though.

Nobody in the history of F1 has driven so many good car as MS has. Especially in terms of reliability is where Ferrari was vastly superiour compared to the Mclaren.

Looking at the results especially at the time this one was an easy explanation and could even be the correct one. It still could, but it turned out later that Schumacher wasn't really that much quicker compared with the overall grid that the results suggested for example in 94-96. Most people involved made their minds back then regardless and people seldom change their minds later on, it's simple psychology. Especially when Schumacher racked up his impressive statistics and still kept a step ahead of his teammates. It isn't however any definite proof that he really was as "good" as they thought, as his teammates were never given a fair shot competing him and on top of that there were very few of them in the end. The technical team and their associates behind him (Ferrari-Bridgestone combination) could also have very likely been the best ever in both prowess and longevity.



Well I don't recall Ron Dennis ever saying that, do you have a source? Regs Frank and Flavio - a sly mind could say that for example hyping up the opposition driver made Frank's cars look better. And Flavio could pay less to his other drivers as they were officially labelled second rate. Just speculating of course.

That's pretty funny. Because just recently Bernie Ecclestone said that Ayrton Senna was better than MS. So your "everybody" statement and that only amateurs think that is disproven

I ask myself that on every single forum I post on. Arm chair experts, you've gotta love em

If some of the forumers on here were running a Grand Prix team, they'd be hiring and firing a new driver every week.

Because he was the best at the time, and one of the best of all time.

But...
*He was not unbeatable
*He needed a top car to be competitive
*He did have his off day
*He was giving advantage over his team mate
*He always had a a point and even podium challenging car every year he raced.

And although Ron thought highly of MS's skill, I would argue he thought MH was his equal. It wasn't like he thought no one could hold a candle to MS.

My question to you now is,

Why does someone who thinks MS is the best driver of his generation, but points out that he was not perfect nor was he heads and shoulders above everyone else by a mile, required to answer your sarcastic question?

What exactly are you arguing, as I have never doubted MS as the best of his generation.

It seems to often on this forum considering MS as the best is not enough. You must state him as the best ever by a country mile, perfect in every way, and made every other driver look silly in comparison. Respecting his skill as the best is just not good enough and gets you labeled a MS hater.

It's just an opinion, like everyone else's.

I think Senna was naturally better. I also think Schumacher was more 'complete'. However, it is just my opinion.

Except for the last one(which is debatable btw), you can use these statements on virtually every WDC since 1950.

Yet not everyone of those WDC was claimed to be heads and shoulders above the rest.

Who made Bernie the ultimate judge? You?

So you agree all of them had similar conditions in which they achieved success ?

YES! Thats been my argument for years. You can't do the impossible in F1. Your either in the right team at the right time or your not. If MS (or any other driver) spent his career in a Minardi he would never have won a single race.

Interesting theory. You are implying :
-that being in the right team at the right time is purely down to luck
-Getting a good drive has nothing to do with the driver at all
-Winning, even in a good car is a piece of cake

Interesting assumptions your jumping to... I never implied no such thing.

Then what exactly are you implying about Michael Schumacher ? Please enlighten us.

I'd wage a guess, it's that MS statistical level of superiority is to a large degree down to other things than pure driving skill, like bunching up with the right people at the right times and creating a perfect working environment for himself, for longer and to extents that are unmatched by any driver-team combination before or since.

So in your opinion even an Alex Yoong*, who had little pure driving skill, could win 7 WDCs in modern F1 by just "bunching up with the right people and creating the right working environment" ?

PS : Not meaning to demean Alex Yoong here. Please replace with any other driver you think really sucked

I haven't implied anything. I have been rather direct by any measurable use of the English language.

Micheal Schumacher was the best driver of his generation. He was however not heads and shoulders better than he rivals as many of his fans would like others to believe.

Well, who would you place above Schumacher on an all time list ? And why ?

That's you just your defensive misintepretation of my post. It's not really worth discussing your fantasy scenario I wasn't even remotely implying.

I'm just trying to understand what you're actually implying about Schumacher. Its a little bit unclear to me. Can you explain ?

What the hell has that got to do with anything?

What does this...

Micheal Schumacher was the best driver of his generation. He was however not heads and shoulders better than he rivals as many of his fans would like others to believe.

have to do with complying an all time list of F1 drivers?

Even if I had MS as number 1, what would that prove?

Seems like you dont think anyone else has ever been better than Schumacher. Well, we have nothing to debate about then !

Not any better than I did in my original post in which neither Alex Yong nor other illustrous backmarkers featured. Sorry.

It's so strange to race as MS in the ps3 game F1CE then see how he is nowadays. I wish F1 hadn't had such a radical change lately, and that testing was allowed...

he was beating senna in sennas last races though

And this shows that he was heads and shoulders better than his rivals?

(Not to mention the fact that they weren't even in the same car...)

MS himself made it very clear that he wouldn't be up to testing in between races and very much prefers the no-testing regulations. It has be brought up various times that he suffered especially because of this, but when the man himself states that testing would burn him out too quickly, that argument can safely put to rest I would say.

With option 13?

... and quicker pit stops due to a removed fuel filter.

Wow he is over the hill lol

rosberg was beating schumacher in schumacher´s last races though

In the sense that the top of the hill in age terms lies most certainly about 7 to 8 years earlier than his current age, yes. That considered he's actually doing a brilliant job, it's just that the expectations of his fans are way too high. His own too, I guess.

ouch.

That was mean.

Yea that's true. I'd have thought he'd jump at the chance to test. But in reality he doesn't really have to prove himself anymore..

I'd just replace the first "was" with "definitely maybe", other than that we agree.

Thats correct, Senna proved his car was faster by gaining pole.

Oops, here we go .............




Yes he was and I can prove it however you can not prove your assumption.




Waiting for "and the TC and launch control" smegheads now ........

See it out, f1 changes alot year to year, infact with no testing it's likely why MS has come back as well along with other reasons, with no testing, he's got more time to himself and family, more time to focus on fitness and chill out. But yeah without testing he won't be making huge gains for the team and himself, the team has to adapt better in a era of race simulation and Michael is such a unique specimen in regardes to driving style and the set ups he does, lets see how the first mercedes car with him in the team works out in the next 2 years, once MS says he can drive consistently with this tyre/car like he used too, something he has not been able to achieve on all tracks, then MS will make his own judgement how good he really is compared to the past, and that's when we'll really know how he is these days, he is more patient and chilled out then alot of people expect these days, but he has his 3 year programme with the team, his 2nd and 3rd season for me will show the promise, ths year has shown how long it's going to take for him to utilise the tools and work with mercedes, not everyone is patient to see that out, he is, we've seen fast times from him, and Spain/Turkey/Monaco showed he found setups to go for the next best points available to him for a car that's not going for a win.

Once he gets that win and gets that big result, it will silence everyone, until then he's going to have to endure one step back while making steps forwards, all the while knowing f1 public will only demand the best from him, spain/turkey/monaco performances/had those not happened, there would be no foundations to base his future attack, but this will be his likely toughest f1 year, given the expectations, the legend he is, alot of people have patience for Tiger Woods and a Roger Federer to go more great things, but neither retired and come back, so with MS you have to be thinking long term and patient as he is, and if then he leaves without showcasing a strong showing and fight, then alot of the nonsense written on the forums can be invited back, but for now it's too early, but if you hang out on forums long enough, you'll see too many people not patient enough to think long term, watching MS struggle now and again, and this year as it has been is tough for fans, not what the sport wants to see, but this chapter is still open for future revisions, we see how people ignore MS beating button at race of champions all the time, but have no clue to what MS is going through in figuring out his driving extraction from the current car, rules change, tyres change, maybe this year is the most difficult car MS has ever drove for himself, and maybe this year is Rosberg's best f1 seaosn ever in a f1 car in comparison to a teamate because of MS driving the car like he hasn't need to for any other f1 car before.

The chapter on MS is work in progress, jump 2 early conclusions now, look silly later.

After a bad race this year, posts become about debunking his previous achievements, after a good race, you see the promise of future additions to a legend. Over his f1 career, MS has been more consistent then anyone. Button and Webber have had truely awful races in the past and have been written off as wasted their f1 chances, and they hadn't even retired yet, yet they have strong seasons later on, and everything is fine, MS is coming back from a retirement having already achieved status, achievement and everything, I'm more inclined to believe a patient MS about his future potential then some of these drivers in top cars now.


Had MS been at ferrari in 2010 and did the same mistakes as Alonso did this year and had the badluck as Alonso has had, they'll be calling for MS's retirement I'm sure. The main thing for MS is to drive these cars like he has driven alot of f1 cars in the past, now he's working with a jenson button car really, but if and the team know what's goings on, and they can utilise his style for the next car in 2011, then it's game on, the current car even with updates has inherent problems-and it's likely compounded or slowed down MS's learning and execution on tracks, Rosberg is doing a fine job with this current car, but it's likely the most difficult car MS has driven yet, so I'm not prepared to rate Rosberg until MS has come up to the standard he's happy with-that should happen in 2011, Rosberg is enjoying a good Trulli doing well against Alonso period in 2004, if we remember Alonso wasn't doing that well in that renault compared to Trulli, and yet Alonso wasn't a retired driving coming back like MS, and Alonso and Kimi did really look awesome on michelin tyres, but neither have looked as great in tyres since then, Alonso has speed, Kimi has speed, Kimi struggled in quali in bridgestones, but it maybe shows even the best drivers will now and again have a period where things don't gel with that car/fia rules that year, and again MS is a returning retired driver, so there's alot of positive possibilities in MS's patience in his return.

I think that working in such a way he also managed to get so many WDCs and GP wins and yes now days you cannot rely only to your driving skills to become WDC it is not enough and probably never was. In this area Schumacher was better then anyone in the new history of F1 racing.

For someone who started watching F1 three weeks ago, that must be considered a reasonable assumption.

I think we should make cheapracer aware that someone has obviously stolen his account data.

That's all I was trying to say.

Good to see that you still recall all the important details.

In regards to this...



So you can prove that MS was head and shoulders above his rivals? If so.... Go ahead. Prove it. I'm not stopping you.

Nice posting Sean but you understand whats going to happen with the Alonso fan boys now that you said this ...

not when schumacher was at his peak though bit difference

Nelson Piquet anyone?

Not only by his fans but also this is especially true for all kind of reporters and media. We will see about that in near future. In his interviews he was very honest about his form in this year and I think if he will see that he cannot compete with top gays he will retire prior the end of his contract.

7 x 1st WDC, 3 x 2nd WDC, 3 x 3rd WDC and incredibly not lower than 4th (once) in his entire F1 career (full season duh) and 91 wins out of 154 podiums from 259 starts and the incredible figure of more than 10% wins of the entire number of GP's ever run in the history of GP racing. Not to mention that the scoring system was changed because of him.

Find me one driver in his era that even gets 20% of those figures.

Now you prove your statement that he wasn't head and shoulders above the rest?

Start by finding me a driver of the same general era that is listed ahead of him in any drivers lists even close behind....

Nelson Piquet what?

MS beat Nelson 2 of 3 finishes but who cares, Nelson was ending and MS was starting - some comparison