I've never tried to insinuate that MS beat NR. That's the difference. In terms of bad luck, MS had far more than KR though...no question.
right...there's more to a story than just the points, and I agree with you, but with Kimi and Massa you're saying the points prove it all, which isn't really correct IMO
No answer from Red Bull - Kimi Raikkonen on Lotus and Ferrari future | Lotus F1 | Formula 1 news, live F1 | ESPN F1 Kimi Raikkonen says he has not had an answer from Red Bull over a potential seat with the team next season. Red Bull is looking to replace Mark Webber in 2014 and Raikkoenn was one of the favourites for the seat until his manager said talks had ended "some time ago" earlier this week. However, Christian Horner yesterday refused to rule out any driver getting the vacancy and Raikkonen said the stall in talks had come from the Red Bull side. "I've had no answer from them and I will see what happens," Raikkonen said. "You will have to really ask them what they will do; I don't know any better than you guys … We haven't heard anything for a while, so obviously that's not the ideal situation but that's how it is." Asked about rumours he could join Ferrari, Raikkonen said: "There's not much I can tell you other than that until there is anything 100% sure I don't have anything to tell. There's a lot of talk that I'm supposed to go to McLaren. I read somewhere that it's Ferrari one day and it's Lotus the next day so … I still don't have a contract so what else can I say?" Raikkonen confirmed he is still awaiting payment from Lotus, saying it was an area he wanted rectifying if he were to stay at the team. "Not as it should, but hopefully those things get sorted quickly." Raikkonen also hinted that he may not have been ill on Thursday when he was absent from Spa. "Maybe I could, it wouldn't change anything for me. You would ask me the same questions today that you would have asked yesterday. There's always reasons for things but I don't have to tell you all of those things."
During the MS comeback, my only beef was with people that acted like Schumi was embarrassing himself when it was quite clear that he was still fast. Yes, he had tons of terrible luck (way more than Kimi had at Ferrari) and the points totals didn't give Michael's driving justice. That said, I never argued the fact that MS lost to Rosberg. BTW- the two situations aren't even remotely comparable. Kimi had not been away from F1 for 3 years in 2008, in fact he had just won a WDC. Kimi was in the same team. Kimi was in the prime of his career. MS had been away from F1 for 3 years. MS was in a completely new team (and new tires). MS was 43. In fact, if you want something to compare it to, Michael's 2006 season with Ferrari is far more applicable. Michael was A.) Racing a grooved tire Ferrari B.) Racing Massa and C.) Had not retired yet. What happened to Massa that year, care to fill us in? Poor old Michael, indeed! I know you thought you could catch me out with the Rosberg quips - oops. So you have no point - at least you're a model of consistency.
Kimi had a slump in 2008. That was mostly down to internal politics anf doesn't mean he is not a top driver.
That's what we call the land of the apologists. You should be enjoying the most recent interview with MS' ex manager Willy Weber: He is tooting his horn, that MS at RB would be winning championships, if they'd only let him in for his second comeback. Sure. PS: I love it when MS fans go against the argument that he was simply too old in his comeback, yet when it comes to explaining the points gap they bring up the age thing themselves. Funny how that works. Age is a huge factor. For MS as well as for any other driver. 40 is definitely the limit in the modern F1.
But he was as competitive with Nico (forget the points), as Nico is with Lewis...so MS in his 40s is as good as lewis, right? or has Nico suddenly learnt how to drive?
Not to rehash the whole debate, but a) I don't buy the "he was as competitive as Nico" argument because I actually do believe in the points rather than 3 seasons of bad luck b) Hamilton is beating Rosberg, the points gap (which is already 40) will continue to widen as Lewis settles into the team and car So no, MS at 40 is not as good as Lewis. MS at 30 certainly was. Better actually.
Not yet forty. Besides: That was 20 years ago. Not exactly modern F1 and he did it in a car that was heads and shoulders above the rest.
I do think F1 has change a lot since the time of Mansell. At the current physical level of the drivers, age does show a lot more than it did 20 years ago.
Outside of this particular argument: It certainly has and not for the better. I lament the times of Mansell/Senna/Piquet and the kind of cars they drove. F1 wasn't so standardized and regulated as it is today. Neither the cars nor the PC BS nor the drivers. No SC back then and instant driver penalties etc. Things have gotten way too corporate. I wonder whether the wheel of time and "progress" will ever turn back once Bernie is no longer in charge?
I was said all those things to explain why comparing the MS/Nico situation to Raikkonen/Massa makes no sense. Reading comprehension. You must have missed the part where I said he was beaten? Again, reading comprehension. It's the incessant vulture haters like yourself that tried so hard to claim he was embarrassing himself, then he does things like blow Nico into the weeds in the rain, tying Nico in qualifying over the season and taking pole at Monaco and you look silly. 2 things: MS was still fast: Fact MS had terrible luck: Fact
You wanna talk facts? Ok, suit yourself: From 2010 to 2012 with Nico to MS Wins: 1:0 Starting from Pole: 1:0 Fastest laps: 2:1 Podiums: 5:1 Points 142:72 89:76 93:49 WDC Position: 7:9 7:8 9:13 Clearly a case of bad luck. 3 years in a row. Sure.
You're still trying to convince me that Nico beat MS when I've already said he did more than once. Amazing. BTW- I love how you don't count the MS Monaco pole. Phrase it as "starting from pole" to fit your agenda. It's so...you.
Actually I was kind by phrasing it that way, because it eliminates any dispute. If you go on Wikipedia, they don't even bother to list the fastest time MS set at Monaco at all. They just give him a big fat zero for poles. That's the hard truth about statistics. The asterisks are forgotten quickly.
