Montoya says NASCAR would challenge Schumi

Prost vetoed Senna at Williams, plain and simple. This is after they drove at McLaren together. Mansell tried to veto Prost later on at Williams, after being together at Ferrari. Senna vetoed Warwick for admittedly different reasons, but the point still remains. All of the top drivers were trying to gain what Schumacher did at Ferrari - a team completely centered aroudn them - and they each achieved moderate success in it in particular seasons. This is not a uniquely Schumacher trait.

The only difference is that Ferrari under Todt is the only team low enough or smart enough, depending on one's perspective, to allow it to persist for almost a decade. Would Senna, Mansell, Piquet, etc. grown tired of this situation? We will never know. But to pretend they were not looking to achieve it is simply not the case.

This argument just seems a stretch to me everytime it comes up. Schumacher is definitely a dirty driver or a cheat, but people try to justify this truth by throwing other stones at him that are unwarranted. Todt was in control at Ferrari.

 

Schummy is the clear emotional favorite on this board-that's true but even if he weren't he is statistically the greatest F1 driver ever....

Best car wins? Sadly, today more than ever. At least back in the 60 and 70s most of the cars had the same engines (Fords). Does anyone honestly think MS would have won multiple WDC were it not for Brawn/Todt/etc.?

 

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle...

 

Absolutely correct. People here forget that Mansell didn't want to partner with Alain again at Williams because he knew that Prost could very well, and more than likely beat him. Alain scored 71 points and came in 2nd just behind Senna while at Ferrari during 1990, while Mansell scored only 37 and finished back in 5th in the championship standings.

Prost is guilty of this as well, he didn't want to go through the same thing with Senna at Williams, as he did at Mclaren. Prost admitted in an interview that he couldn't keep up with him anymore. " I can't push like him all the time, maybe i'm getting too old."

So Mansell said to hell with it, and went to Indy cars while Prost managed to get his way. Michael shouldn't be the only one criticized for these occurances.

 

Wow, this has certainly turned into a MS bashing session here.

Allow me to present to you an entirely different point of view here: Time has changed and the world of F1 racing has also changed since the 80's. Michael Schumacher was a product of the 90's and believed that in order for a team to be successful, a team must have a number 1 driver and a number 2 driver as support. Case in point, when was the last time you can think of when the world champion winning team had two top drivers sharing an equal status? Let's us take out the MS's title years and see:

1989 - Prost over Senna was the last year when two equally capable driver were team-mates. 1990: Berger was no where close to Senna and don't even mention Michael Andretti. 1992: Patrese was obviously the #2 with Mansell being #1 at William.1992 - 1993: Hill can't even share the same dinner table with Mansell, Prost or Senna. 1996: JV's first year at William, Hill was clearly the number 1 driver there. 1997: Can anyone even name JV's team-mate in 1997? ------------------Frentzen. 1998 - 1999: Sure, DC was an equal to MH, NOT!! And now in 2005 - 2006: Does anyone here actually believe that Fisi is equal in both performance and status to Alonso?

And now, the teams that were competitive also had a clear team order (As in the driver of the non-world title team.) MH with DC, KR with DC, KR with JPM (Notice how JPM was never really a factor ever since he left William. He never even was in position to challenge MS even when he was at William).

There you go, facts do not lie. And let's look ahead to 2007: Alonso has a rookie as a team-mate......Do you not think Ron Dennis and the mighty McLaren-MB is not able to lure away another big name driver or at least someone more established if they wanted to? Instead of bashing on MS, what about maybe, just maybe, that MS/Ferrari and other title winning teams knows a thing or two about actually winning the title instead of winning on paper with a formidible driver lineup.

 

Fearless <> Stupid

Saw a guy couple days ago on the Charlie Rose talk show(don't remember name), who is only the 5th mountain climber to make it up/down the world's highest mountains.
Interesting guy...had a saying, something to the effect "getting to the summit doesn't really count unless you make it all the way down, too". Turned around 100m from the summit of Everest on one of his attempts cuz he didn't like the chances/timing of being able to get back down before the weather hit.
Attributed a LOT of his success with being able to correctly evaluate risk(s) during a climb. Others tend to view him as a bit conservative.

Michael is evidently judging the risks(as he perceives them) of different racing venues, not so much his ability to participate in them.

I suspect his judgment of all of this is somewhat different than the rest of us mere mortals...

 

True but saying JPM is a wanker is wrong. it's not like he never had a shot at the title. People make it sound like he had no business driving in F1. He's still better than some people that are out there now.

 

Hell, he's better than MOST of the people out there. He just needs to learn to calm down and get his fitness in order. I think the only drivers on the grid for next year that could beat him immediately are of course Alonso and Kimi, and that's nothing to be ashamed of. I couldn't keep from cringing when I constantly saw him make stupid mistakes during the 06 season, such a waste of talent. He reminds me of Nigel Mansell to be honest, just a little less patient.

 

Excellent point.

C.

 

Actually JPM was simply responding to coments made by Schumacher regarding NASCAR. I have yet to read JPM making any unsolicited comment about Schumacher since he left F1.

If anything, it seems that Schumacher's comments revealed he still felt the need to denigrate JPM indirectly by making disparaging comments about NASCAR. The fact that Schumacher still feels the need to throw jabs at JPM perhaps tells us all we need to know about MS?

Montoya didn't start the exchange, Schumacher did. Remember that.

 

Williams: 1996 & 1997
McLaren: 1998 & 1999
Renault: 2005 & 2006

In fact, every world championship team that did not have Schumacher as a driver since 1994 had a clear no #1 policy. Both drivers had equal opportunity with equal cars. That one driver won and the other didn't has no bearing on the discussion.

In all cases, each driver was given equal equipment, equal access to spare cars, and equal treatment by the team until that driver was mathematically eliminated from contention. That is the official policy at Renault, McLaren and Williams.

It is most certainly NOT the policy at any Schumacher-driving team.

Schumachers achievements will always be tainted by two FACTS:

1) He benefitted from the death of Senna, his wins and titles came in the vacuum following Senna's death. He would never have accumulated such numbers with Senna driving the Williams in the mid-90s.

and 2) He never drove alongside a teammate who could challenge him in equal equipment. He retired rather than drive alongside Kimi. Senna, Prost, and Mansell all drove with WDCs as teammates, Schumacher drove alongisde the likes of Irvine, Massa, Herbert, Verstappen...

 

My Dad was doing lighting at the Super Bowl once, and a paper interviewed him, what they said in the paper was almost entirely made up and never what he said.

 

1996: You really believe that there were no clear #1 at William? Hill even came out and said it in one interview that JV is still young, he will get his chances at the title. Frank William may not have said it in so many words but there was a number 1 and 2. In 1996, Schumacher and Ferrari are not even in the same time zone when compared to the mighty William. No one was a threat to them winning the titles.

1997: With JV and HHF, JV was clearly the number 1. Did you really follow F1 back in 1997? MS finished the year behind JV with HHF in 3rd, until MS's points and season were removed. HHF won ONE race that year. You call that equal drivers on even status??!!

1998: Do we really need to go there? You are putting MH and DC in the same league?? DC won ONE race that year with MH and MS taking most of the remaning races. Guess who else won one that year? Hill with Jordan-Honda.

1999: DC finished 4th that year as oppose to MH taking the title. Ferrari actually won the WCC with Irvin 2nd in the WDC standings. Even HHF finished before DC in 3rd in the Jordan-Honda. Again, DC can't even travel in MH's wake let along being on the equal footing as MH.

2005 & 2006: Are you kidding me!!??? Fisi and Alonso are two equaly drivers in abilities and status quo within a team???!!! Fisi was a none factor in both years as far as the WDC is concerned.

News flash for you, all teams have a #1 and a #2 driver, especially with winning teams and in the competitive years. They just don't come out in the public and say it or to display it as brash as Ferrari did. If you will, go back to my other post and go over the stats yourself, 1989 was the last year that a team (McLaren) truely had 2 of the best drivers (Prost and Senna) on the grid fighting it out - that was also a year that no one else other than themselves were a threat to both titles, hence Ron Dennis/McLaren can afford to have them dueling it out. As for equal status, let's not forget that Prost made public comments on how he is getting 2nd rated equipments compared to Senna. Which was the main motivation for his move to Ferrari in 1990.

 

Obviously JPM is simply frustrated with never ever rising to MS's level in F1. JPM had his moments and is without question an excellent driver - all F1 drivers are the best in the world, even the back markers. However, JPM is now in a position to mouth off and act like he is finally better than Shumie at something. Something that he KNOWS MS will never challenge him in. He is finally "safe" with his "I'm better than you" comments.

Sad really. Especially from a grown up with mad skills.

 

I suspect NASCAR, or any other form of racing for that matter, would challenge any driver...IMHO, if an endeavor is not challenging, one should not be involved anyway...

 

+1

JPM simply never lived up to the hype.

 

599 GTB Nascar entry. Now that would be worth a watch

Mike

Oh I guess it would have to be the 430 V8 and all

 

These alleged "FACTs" are 100% speculative; maybe MS benefitted from AS's death; on the flipside I can easily say that both AS and AP benefitted from GV's death, etc, etc. 100% conjecture.

Fact:In 1994 MS won the first 2 races of the season and AS went into San Marino with 0 points-AS spun in Brazil-his hometown race-trying to catch MS. I remember watching that race on ESPN and the commentators were in shock-as was I-that MS beat AS on his home ground. Still remember the commentators talking about a "possible changing of the guard in the F1 world".

Don't get me wrong-I think AS is one of the top 5 drivers of all time and deserves mention with all the greats-but don't give me any "if this happened or if that didn't happen" BS. Too speculative.

 

I read the article, I didn't see him talking 'badly' about Schmacher anywhere in it.

Face it, you have different personalities in EVERY sport in the world - some yap, and some don't. Some can back up what they yap, and others don't.
Who is to say what would have happened if JPM went to Ferrari ? Maybe his attitude or personality may have been more sedate, like MS, but do we want a grid full of trolls running around ? That's not meant to say MS is a troll, but let's face it, he's not the most likeable guy on the grid in the eyes of all the other drivers, and they have their reasons, some valid.
In nascar, you have troublemaking yappers like Kurt Busch, and then you have folks that punch folks like Jimmy Spencer, and then you have some that do both like Tony Stewart, you have teams people 'hate' (like da Raiders, and da Yankees), and teams people 'like', live with it, for gods' sake, that's what makes it fun.

As far as MS having a hard time in nascar, maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't, I'm guessing he would, for awhile. For one, he's only raced karts and formula cars, and for another, he already said he doesn't like walls, that's a psychological hit right there.

Paul - you have it right also.

 

Maybe so but the Williams had problems that they were working out, Senna was still new to the team. It would have been a hard fight no doubt. He had lost none of his speed, the lap before he hit the wall at Imola was the 3rd fastest lap of the race. On full tanks. MS and Hill beat the time on empty tanks (No refuelling then).

 

Who has ?

The last guy I know that came into F1 with high expectations AND lived up to them was JV, with a championship. Argue all you want about how great the team was he stepped into, or the 'lack of competition', facts are facts - he won a WDC. Period.
I don't think anyone in the last 30 years came into F1 with as high of expectations ('hype') thrust on them by the press as JV - not Senna, not Prost, not Piquet, not Mansell, not even Lauda on his return, and certainly not Schumacher.

 

Did any of you calling Montoya a whiner actually read the story? He only said what he did because Shumie put down NASCAR and effectively Montoya. He was responding to comments made by MS, and was likely asked about it by the writer of the story. I dont see whining there.

 

Quoted for the truth.

Not to mention you can go on youtube and see that there are at least a couple times when DC let off for Mika to pass. One time in particular was the first race of the 1998 or 1999 season, at Melbourne, and Mika had a bad pit stop, when he rejoined the race behind DC, DC then let him overtake him for the win. This is only ONE example of driver favoritism, I can certainly list or link to actuall footage of others.

 

You are 100% correct. Another driver with high expectations? Ironically enough GV, which is why JV had his expectations.....

 

There was no contractual #1. I didn't see JV pull over for Hill in the first race of the season to let him take the win ala Rubens, but I did see him take pole and run off with the race until slowed by a leaking engine. Not too many #2 drivers can do that too often...

You need to understand that there is a big difference between having one driver better than the other and having one driver CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED to serve as #2. As I stated previously, no team other than Ferrari had a stated #1 driver. Williams provided both drivers with equal equipment and hence equal opportunity to win. If one driver is better able to accomplish this feat, then good for him.

Yes, I followed F1 in 1997, I followed it in 1987 and 1977 as well. So what of it?

I call the 1997 Williams team, once again, as a team with two drivers having equal equipment. If JV is faster than Frentzen, then JV is faster than Frentzen. But Frentzen didn't have a lesser opportunity, he just made less with the opportunity he was given.

Yes, but DC (***ONCE AGAIN***) started the year with exactly the same opportunity to win as Mika. McLaren's STATED policy is that they employ two #1 drivers, no driver is asked to support the other until that driver is mathematically eliminated form the championship.

Ibid

Talent? No

Status quo within team? Yes.

Having one driver better than the other is not the same as having one driver contractually obligated to be subservient to the other. Very big distinction there, sport.

In 1996, Hill and JV fought down to the wire for the WDC. Didn't you follow F1 in 1996?

Hmmm, so McLaren allows their drivers to duke it out when they are clearly well ahead of the field but Ferrari enforces its #1 and #2 status on its drivers when they are clearly ahead of the field?

That speaks more for McLaren than it does for Ferrari, don't you think?