The Measure of Schumacher....

That's not totally correct either. the Ferrari was crap for most of those years since Prost had been run out of town, but the car and the team had started looking up in 95. MS was a big part of the turnaround but he wasn't the whole story either. Many people were quite upset that Ferrari chose to dump Alesi and Berger for MS.

 

Sorry chief, my brother has worked for Mercedes for 30 years...you may want to check your data... If you look at pure lap times, consistancy, rain and night driving, and car development, there was no equal. It is true that Wendlinger was quick, and quicker on occasion, but if the team could have only one person to go with, it would have been MS.

 

I always check my data, chief. In the 1989 season F3, Karl Wendlinger was champion, with Michael finishing 3rd behind Heinz-Harald Frentzen. There goes your point about MS being dominant in the lower formula. In the Mercedes Junior Team, he was obvioulsy good but didn't show anything outwardly that would make him "dominant" as you say. If your brother did work for Mercedes and what you state was indeed the case fair enough, but there were a few people surprised that Schumacher was signed for Jordan instead of Wendlinger or HHF for that matter. His pace at Spa was a surprise and the rest is history.

 

Yeah I remember when people were talking like HHF would be better than MS, because he beat MS in the lower formula. Turns out, although HHF was better in F3 and sportscars, MS was better in F1, because HHF was smoked by Villeneuve, and only managed to make somewhat of a comeback by smoking an old and uninterested Damon Hill.

 

Prost was ready to have anyone as his team-mate, that is until Senna started to beat him regularly and was starting to taking over the team's 31 status. Prost took away Mansell's status at Ferrari the same way Senna took his at McLaren, which resulted in Mansell's refusal to drive with Prost at Williams. The math was simple, Renault's V-10 was the engine to have in the mid-90's, and they wanted a French driver to win and Prost wanted to have more titles than Senna. Had Mansell stayed at Williams and not moved to CART, he probably would have repeated as WC. Let's not forget that Senna couldn't stand the fact that Prost has one more title than he does which promoted his move from McLaren to Williams and IIRC, he even took a paycut to do so.

Face it, the fact is that none of them are saints. It is a necessary evil that drives them to become F1 WCs.

 

+1.

HHF being faster or slower than MS is meaningless. IIRC, Senna edged Brundle for the F3 title but look at how different their F1 careers turns out to be.

 

Good point Pete, but still, if's and but.

 

Damn, Luis, you beat me to it.

A cursory look at the racing journalism at the time would clearly show that Schumacher, while considered talented, was not rated as highly as HHF or Wedlinger in either the junior formulae or at Mercedes-Sauber.

His F1 debut came as a major surprise to everyone, including me.

 

Let me offer you some advice:

 

+1

Prost drove alongside at least 5 WDCs: Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, Mansell and Hill, and beat them all.

Schumacher inherited a seat alongside Nelson Piquet for five races in 1991, who outpointed him 6-4. He could have driven alongside Kimi Raikkanen in 2007 but retired rather than face a top-level teammate in equal equipment.

 

FACTS: Michael Schumacher= 7 WDC

Senna, Wendlinger, HHF, = 3 WDC

 

Ayrton Senna = Great
Michael Schumacher = Great

It's fun to compare drivers and have an emotional favorite, but beyond that you cannot definitively state one is/was better than the other. To merely juxtapose statistics ignores the reality that Senna's passing opened an enormous window for Schumacher. At the beginning of 1994, there were two all-time greats on the grid--one proven in Senna, the other in-the-making with Michael. The rest of the drivers were capable winners on a good day, but couldn't carry the hats of either Michael or Ayrton. Damon Hill benefitted from being in the best chassis, and Mika is someone I never considered equal. Close, but not quite.

 

Reminder - see above for the point of this thread.

In his era, MS was clearly without equal - the record books show that clearly enough - and it is always sad when a 'favorite' like him retires. Still, we have his splendid achievements to reflect on and be thankful for. I for one am very happy to be able to say that I saw his entire F1 career and saw him drive 'live' at several F1 GPs around the world. To me, that's special - just as special as the times I witnessed, for example, Senna race (especially Monaco).

Comparing MS to previous or present drivers is pointless and just leads to (amusing) emotional arguments.

 

Some folks use statistics like drunks use lamposts. For support rather than illumination...

 

Excellent Post Jack.

 

Exactly, your mastery of manipulating stats is certainly second to none. I am sure you remember that 1991 was the year Schumacher made his debute in F1 as a mid-season replacement. He raced in a total of 6 races that year, the first as a Jordan-Ford driver and the last 5 as a Bennetton-Ford driver. He did not have the benefit of any testing prior to his Spa debute which ignited his amazing F1 career. Nelson Piquet on the other hand, was already a 3-time WC by 1991 and has been with the Bennetton team since 1990 and was clearly the team leader at the time. To compare their stats from 1991 is not just laughable, and with all due respect, is completely idiotic. We all know you hate Schumacher with passion, but seriously Ted, that comment of yours is seriously sub-standard when compared to your normal posts.

 

You miss my point completely.

I am not just referring to Schumacher's first year, I am talking about his 16+ seasons in F1.

In all that time, the only WDC he ever drove alongside in equal machinery was a teammate he inherited. Prost, on the other hand, never had an issue with driving alongside a WDC in the other car.

While Prost was driving alongside the likes of Lauda, Senna and Mansell, Schumacher paired himself with Martin Brundle, Jos Verstappen and Johnnie Herbert...

Hardly the stuff of legends.

By the way, I don't hate Schumacher with passion, I respect his achievements but I also recognize that, despite the sycophantic fawnings on this thread, he is not of the likes of Fangio, Clark or Senna.

 

schu=7wdc, stripped all sennas records, still alive to make a comeback if he wants

senna=3wdc , end of

the rest is BS

 

Let's compare what is comparable: for example number of victories per grand prix raced...

Maybe we should put Juan Manuel Fangio and Jim Clark in the mix too...

 

The Schumacher statistic nuts don't want to talk about stuff like that...

 

Why don't we embrace ALL the great drivers and leave them in their eras...

By the way, Schumi himself is not comfortable being compared to the great champions, so who are we to do so?

 

What does he know that we don't...

 

He's more humble than some of his supporters to start with...

 

There is no argument quoting/comparing facts, when one has had his life/career cut short..

 

100% Agreed on that one, it is very hard to compare drivers from different eras, the reason the Senna/Schumacher comparisons come up so much is that one had his career cut short at his peak. As did Clark.