Schumacher No 1 ????

Shumi is a great driver. Is he the best? No. I don't think he is the very best ever. Shumi has very little competition. When Haki was racing he caused Shumi lots of troubles. Unlike a lot of other great F1 drivers. Senna is one of my all time favorites. As is Jim Clark and several others.

 

Yes Schumie is the best F1 driver ever. Everyone say he has no competion, that is because he is in the "legend" class of drivers. When great drivers race against phenominal drivers, the phenominal drivers win, and Michael is a phenominal driver. But let us go back to the early 90's when he did have competion. He duked it out with the big boys Sena, Mansel, and Prost, using a teenie V8 and did very well, matter of fact He won a championship. After those guys left the scene, he was beating Damon and Mika, who both had superior cars. Guess what he won another championship, in a car that was not as good as his rivals. Then he left to Ferrari and had to start all over again. Guess what he's doing it again, but this time he's not giving up his ride. Michael wins in the dry and in the wet. He has started from the back of the pack to come back and WIN! Time will prove that Michael is the greatest F1 driver to date. He holds all the records, some of them by rediculous margins. How can you say that the guy who holds all of the records is not the greatest? That is just plain stupid. That is like saying, at the time, "Well...... yeah Yegar broke the sound barrier.....but he's not the fastest guy ever to fly an airplane". Or, "yeah ...... Ali was the champ for years.... but he's not the greatest". Or, "sure, Bob Beaman held the record for the longest jump ever, for years......... but he really wasn't that great because nobody else can jump that far". Morons,...... Schumacher is the greatest F1 driver ever. Why? Because it will be decades before another driver comes along that can dominate like Schumie does.

 

In my opinion Michael is the best all round, most complete driver ever. However I think that Senna had more raw speed than Shumi, he competed in far fewer GP's but still managed to get 3 Championships whilst competing against Prost ( another top 10 driver of all time ) and more importantly got 65 Pole positions out of 162 starts, a kill rate of over 40%. Michael so far has a kill rate of about 29%. I think this demonstrates that Senna was fastest over a single lap, but Schumi would probably be better over a whole race.

Other contenders for the Greatest are arguably Clarke, Fangio and possibly John Surtees, who was the only man to win a world championship on 2 wheels and 4!

Ernie; I think your point that the statistics and records don't lie is only true up to a certain point. Motorsport is definitely a team sport, and the team has a big influence on the results. Stirling Moss was undoubtedly a great Driver yet He never won a championship, and if you use pure statistics, Moss would not feature as high as his talent would suggest. Also it is very difficult to compare like with like. Fangio and Moss drove in a different era from Clark and Stewart, who in turn drove very different cars from the modern era, even in the past decade technology has changed drastically. The different cars throughout the different eras have required vastly different driving styles, and possibly different mental attitudes to drive them fast. Stirling Moss is famous for saying that the Drivers of today, driving these ultra safe cars, are far more likely to take risks than drivers of his era who didn't even wear seatbelts! Also don't forget that the rules have changed drastically 0ver the decades most significantly on the way points have been awarded, for instance last year (2003) Michael scored 93 points from 6 wins, Raikkonen who only won once scored 91 points, my point is that if the points were awarded as in previous years (i.e. 10,6,5,4,3,2,1) Raikkonen would only have scored 75 points in the season! (I think my maths is correct).

Obviously this is a matter of debate, which is what makes it so interesting. Its just a shame we can't see them race together in equal cars at an equal experience level, but then for that fantasy race what era cars would you choose, what circuit, what weather etc etc????????

 

We have discussed this one here a few times, but since it is the off season and not much else going, why not have another go at it.

What defines a driver as the best? The goal of a F1 driver is the championship. Michael has reached that goal more than any other driver, so that would make him the best looking at it from that perspective.

Also taking any other statistics (aside from Poles, but that's probably gonna change next year) he is #1 on everything. So numerically he is the best.

Raw speed, capability to build a team, to setup a car, to perform constantly at the highest level, to control a race and win a championship, again I'd vote for him. Others were great in that too. Senna, Prost, Lauda and others. Is he the best in that regard? Maybe.

Finally from the fan's perspective things might be a bit different. People who have been around long enough to have seen Gilles Villeneuve powerslide through Long Beach would probably not put Michael as #1 in the charisma category. I know I don't.

 

There is no such thing as the best driver ever. IMO it is impossible to compare great drivers from one era to the other. But, Schu is one of the best drivers that F1 has seen.

 

Speaking the obvious here, perhaps. But as of this moment, Michael's got scoreboard. Any take beyond that'll be an opinion.

 

according to his driving record, he IS the best. Most Wins, post Poles, most Season titles--

Racing has changed a lot, so throwing an old-timer into Michael's seat wouldn't prove anything, nor would pitting them in different cars.

There really can't be a comparison, other than the statistics. Michael is the most winningest F1 driver EVER, and that is probably the only way you can compare it.

 

To the point, and well said...

 

I think the only way to answer questions like these is to ask yourself, "Who do I like the most?" We know there are a few drivers that are always brought into consideration for the title of All Time Greatest. Schumacher definitely qualifies as one of those. So does Senna, Fangio and perhaps a couple others. Arguments can be made for or against all of them. So, it boils down to other issues such as character and so on whenever we choose one over the others.

We say "Michael hasn't had the competition other champions have had", but what we really mean to say is "Michael is a bit on the nerdy side, dresses like Joe Euro-80s and could stand to loosen up a bit. I'm just not comfortable with this guy on top of my list."

Senna was "cooler" than Michael. Besides being the great racer he was, he possessed a Latin charm, a sense of humor and big presence. Senna was the type of guy who you could picture walking into most any room, anywhere and commanding the attention of those inside. I don't get that from Michael. I picture him at home wearing a frilly apron and washing the dishes while his wife tells him "Ja, you are not zee Virld Champion of ZEES haus!"

 

Ja but will anyone else wash dishes with the same flair and consistency - taking exactly 6 min 4 secs on Monday, and on Tuesday all the while giving copious feedback on the handling of the sponge and power of the cleaning solution ...

And who else but Schumi with his innate mastery of dishwashing technology to get an improvement of a second every month! Besides Barrichello would be always two cups behind

 

You raise some interesting points, as always:
- I would not have called Senna "cooler" in a nerd contest with Schumacher. Senna would have definitely been the nerdier. Did you ever see how he packed his 80 style briefcase? OCD to the extreme. And a guy who is on top of the world and plays with R/C planes as his past time? Not that there is anything wrong with that, but compare that to playing with real helicopters as Didier and Gilles that. Now THAT is cool.
- Also I would not agree on the picture you paint about Michael. I truly believe the guy in his private life is one cool dude who plays soccer with his pals in Switzerland and rides a Harley through the States.

However I do agree with you on the discomfort level about being a Michael fan. I personally think he is the best there ever was, but I really can't find myself liking the person he portrays in the interviews. He acts like a corporate robot programmed to say the same boring things over and over again. And there is the difference to Senna who always spoke his mind even if it meant, that he had to fly to Paris and "apologize" for some of the things he said. Even people as cold as the Professor (Prost) or the Computer (Lauda) spoke their minds once in a while whereas Michael uses a PR woman to write down for him what he will say. And it is not a sign of the times we live in, big mouth JPM is proof that you can survive in F1 while speaking your mind (whether what you say makes any sense or not is besides the point).

 

Don't forget the times when Corinne tells him that they're in a hurry and he's able to shave precious tenths off of each plate

Andreas, the toys notwithstanding, Ayrton just had a flair about him that eludes Schumi. Michael never would have jokingly thrown Gerhard Berger's briefcase out of their helicopter because he never would have allowed another driver to share his helicopter in the first place because it's all a big part of his firm standing as #1 driver on the team and any sign of weakness could jeopardize that perception which is why every "i" is dotted and every "t" crossed regarding such matters even though Michael could handily destroy any teammate offered without it being stated in every contract that this must be the case yadda yadda yadda...

 

Gilles, I think Schumacher delibrately restrains himself in public and its not because he is a robotic, humourless chap.

The amount of worldwide coverage of everything they do at the racetrack and out of it is unprecedented. Even back in the 80s, it was a little more relaxed atmosphere.

Today, Michael is always in the limelight being the leading driver of the last decade. His actions, words are copiously noted down and interpreted or mis-interpreted to a degree unknown in the Alan Jones era.

To Michael, the most important thing is driving and winning. The rest are less important. Therefore I see his non-controversial replies to questions as an effective mechanism to answer the questions without it biting him back. Also, I think with age and maturity he is adopting a more senior statesman like role in F1.

Take Imola for instance. Montoya was all fire and brim lashing out at Michael for what he thought was poor driving. Michael could have lashed back and told Montoya that he was guilty of the same in the past. But he didnt he quietly sidestepped the issue and it was over by the next race. If he had chosen to turn into a war of words, they would be debating this issue for several more months leading to more distractions during the race weekend.

 

Yeah, maybe that's the root of my problem with him. The fact that all he is is a racing driver. Perhaps it's unfair in this day and age to expect the whole package from professionals. After all, it's his job, and all he does is do it better than anyone else ever has. Like a lot of people, I tend to miss the older days when the stakes were not quite so high--it was only a matter of life or death after all and money wasn't as much of a driving force. I guess, also, that we've seen so much of Michael in front of a camera the last 10 years that no matter WHAT he would be like, it could become tiresome. Overall, I prefer someone a little less antiseptic, but that's just me. I just feel like he's been so near-perfect for so long that we never get to see much of the human side to him, a fallible element if you will.

 

Agree fully!

 

Hmmm,

I think modern times hurts the image of MS so much that for many he will never be the deserving champion ... of their hearts that is.

Motor racing over the years has got more and more professional to the point that it has become dull ... yes dull is the right word. Motor racing is supposed to be the ultimate gladiator sport, where real men and real cars battle it out to ultimately decide who has got the biggest balls . Yes that is actually what it is all about. MS gets in his car and wins so he can say fnck you to JPM and every other driver and person on the planet ... being the F1 WC gives him total right to say 'I can drive better than you d!ckhead' to anybody.

When it comes down to it there are very, very few things more important to us males than how we perform behind a steering wheel. I bet to many it is more important than how we satisfy our partners!

So (yes there is a point to my ramblings) the modern version of the sport has got to the stage where everything is perfect and thus we are loosing that core feeling that we are supposed to be witnessing MS brilliantly stating his claim to being the best damn driver in the world ... being able to walk up to any of us and say 'I AM a better driver than you!'.

This was naturally going to happen as we clamber to solve everything and satisfy ourselves with the orgasim of technology ... but what are we forgetting about life as we tread this path: PASSION and quality of life.

Nowadays we are so focused on quantity of life that we have forgotten about what really matters, ie. how good each day is on the quality gauge. When was the last time any of you were driving to work on Monday morning and satisfyingly found yourself thinking about how fncken awesome that weekend was ? ... be honest! I find myself thinking, yep got a lot done over the weekend ... guess it must have been good.

This is the problem with MS ... not his fault at all, just our modern soulless thinking. MS is 100% committed to racking up the statistics when I have not witnessed a quality race win for hmmm, maybe 4 seasons. I have not sat on the edge of my seat, sweating, biting my nails (yes bad habit and all) stressing big time about whether MS can pull it off again.

This lack of quality wins is what clouds our views on MS, it is what makes us state that he has no opposition, and has a car superiority, has a teammate that will go down on his knees for him any time he wants ... is that true?, heck I do not know, but it is getting harder to justify his brilliance because it has been such a long time since he was remotely pushed. I was impressed how well he did at the race of champions thingy ... and that brings me to another point.

In Stirling Moss's day the F1 drivers used to drive anything, from saloon cars to anything they got their hands on. This gave us spectators and racing lovers the ability to judge them in different cars ... imagine how that would solve MS's image, if he got out of his dominant F1 Ferrari and then kicked @rse in a BMW saloon car ... with flamboyant slides, etc.

But ofcourse that would not happen nowadays as all the teams would harp on about the specialists needs of each category of racing, etc. (BS I say, if you are a racing driver you adapt, etc.)

Thus in closing you cannot just keep on looking at the stats ... that is just maintaining the incredibly dull view of life we currently have. Lets look at the quality of each race every driver has run, the odds they were against and how they raised the spectators and opposition.

Thus IMO the greatest has to be Nuvolari ... won against amazing odds, developed the 4 wheel drift (for pete's sake!!) and has the most wonderful passionate history written about just about every race he entered. Don't get me wrong MS is up there, but his race history will be written down in the moden boring way: X number of wins out of Y races ... who gives a fnck, I want to read X brilliant against the odds wins ...

Pete
Lets remind ourselves that motor racing is supposed to be passionate, supposed to get the adrenaline pumping and us all swearing and cursing at those who have the wrong point of view, regarding teams and drivers

 

Bollocks , ofcourse he would be able to adjust. He was able to adjust to whatever he was given in his day ... it would be no different, ie. he would have grown up with wings and slicks and tarseal, etc.

Just like if MS was born in the 20's he would have drifted P3 Alfa's like the best of them.

What makes a racing driver is the burning ambition in their gut that makes them want to be faster than the other guy ... it does not matter what the tools are, they will, because of this hunger, master the tools.

Pete

 

Pete, that was a lot to absorb! Very poignant, however. My feelings about motorsport are along the same lines. Now, I'm not some sadistic, blood-lust death freak, but at the risk of sounding like one I worry about a by-product of the incredible safety of modern race cars. Follow me here:

One of the great things that I've always preached to others about auto racing was in the ultimate humility of its participants. Racing drivers never grandstanded themselves as being something above the sport itself, but willing, risk-accepting sportsmen who were passionate about their trade. No such thing as hot-dogging and so forth. Somebody mentioned a "gladiatorial" image, and indeed they seemed like real men going head to head, laying it all on the line. Nowadays it seems that drivers have the luxury of not living with the spectre of death perched on their shoulders. We're coming up on 11 years since the last Formula 1 fatality (thankfully), and as many have commented there's a risk of complacency and false confidence. I don't wish harm upon anyone, but I also don't want the drivers to develop the attitudes of other athletes. Even the driver squabbles used to seem more macho, rather than the occasional hissy-fits we get nowadays. To use Pete's term, it gets dull.

 

Arh, good point and thus yes indeed we do have the possibility that there are other variables not just their inbuilt drive/motivation.

I think others have stated before that timing has a lot to do with it also ...

Pete

 

Look, when Lauda came along he was head and shoulders above his competition...it wasn't even funny. He was thought to be an inimitable genius. Then Prost came along and was a half-second a lap faster...most magazines now rank Prost above Lauda in all-time F1 skill. And then guess what...you had Senna come along and battle legendarily with Prost. Senna was better, there was absolutley no doubt. Monaco GP, bettered his qualifying time by over 1 second...I still remember the lap...and he was battling Piquet (another genius), Mansell, Rosberg at the same time...
And Schumacher, who did he battle with and vanquish? Damon Hill? Mika Hakkinen? Jacques Villeneuve? Give me a break....Schumacher hasn't had another Formula 1 "great" to dice with for any signiifcant amount of time. If Senna, Prost, Mansell were in the cars at the same time as Schumacher Schumi, unfortunately, would by considered in a Mika Hakkinen-like light.

 

Well Schumacher did compete against these guys for the first three years of his career and won a total of 6 races against Mansell, Prost and Schumacher. He also beat an ageing Nelson Piquet in a similar Benetton.

He had a good number of podiums to show for his efforts - not too shabby considering the Benetton was not as good as the Williams and the Mclaren till 1994.

Sure, if Senna would have survived and raced for say another 4 years (at which time he would be 38), Michael would not have won that many races but it would not have been a walkover for Senna ... In fact I think if Senna survived in Imola and if Michael did not get that multiple race suspension for passing Hill on the warm up lap, the 1994 season would have been a nail-biting finish. In fact assuming Michael drove for the same two teams, I would give Michael the 1994 title for Benetton, Senna the 1995 and 1996 title for Williams and Hakkinen the 1998 title for McLaren.

So Michael would today be a six time F1 champion with maybe 10 wins perhaps. Senna would have been a 5 time WDC ...