Montoya says NASCAR would challenge Schumi

GV died 3 years before Senna made his F1 debut.

While admittedly it is speculation, I think you would be hard-pressed to argue that Schumacher would have won as many GPs or championships as he did with Senna driving the same Williams that took Hill and JV, two drivers of much lesser stature, to World Championships. Furthermore much of Schumacher's success was realized after he made the move to Ferrari. Had Senna lived, it is legitimately arguable that Schumacher might have never had the chance to go to Ferrari as that team's interest in Senna at that time is well known.

It is unquestionable that had Senna lived, he would have won more GPs and WDCs. These would almost certainly have included races and championships subsequently won by MS.

Speculation maybe, but I like the odds.

 

There's no way Senna would have gone to Ferrari, the Williams was just too good from 1994-1997. I highly doubt he would have continued after 1997, but I imagine if he had, he would go back to Mclaren to be partnered again with Mika since 1998 is when Mclaren became competitive again.

Oh and what do you think of the statement I made about DC deliberately slowing down so Mika could pass at the very first race of either the 98 or 99 season. You and I both know that David wouldn't do that out of the kindness of his heart.

 

I guess you must have been on the race staff at Williams F1 team during all those years as you seem to know about everything that really went on at Williams. So, please tell us what Frank Williams and Patrick Head are really like in person.

Let me reassure you, if HHF was a major factor in the duel between MS and JV, Williams would have asked HHF to move his car over so JV can take the win. HHF was just there as a spectator who happened to be sitting inside a F1 race car going varooom, varoooom.......

That was back when Prost and Senna were on the team !!! They had two equally capable title winning drivers that were killing everyone else with the freakish Honda engine.

Yes, yes. Who else was closing in on them, challenging for the titles? NOBODY!!

That just says that Ferrari staff are not as good of actors as their counterparts in McLaren, Williams or Renault. The other teams hide the facts better while Jean Todt should be taking acting lessons from his fiancee' Michelle Yeo.

 

If Senna had lived and gone back to McLaren as you said, I am pretty sure that he would be the #1 driver, contractual or not.

To be fair tho, MH and DC had a gentlemen's agreement that year. In a situation that both were on the front role, whoever takes the first corner should go on and win the race. Which by the way, ended after that race. The agreement went well, don't you think? And in Ferrari's case, RB only signed the supposely #2 contract, but did not have a gentlemen's agreement with Ferrari or MS. *LOL*

 

And thats all I have to say

 

My understanding was that Mika and DC had an agreement that whoever took the first corner would take the race. Mika mistakenly pitted ahead of DC due to a faulty pit signal (I believe) and came out behind him. DC chose to honor their original agreement and give the race back to Mika.

 

You don't have to be a member of the team to read the statements made by every single person involved as to what their team policies are. You would have to be a complete idiot to not know that McLaren and Williams do not have contractual #1 and #2 drivers. This is not speculation, this is a well-known and widely-reported fact, straight from the mouths of the team principals.



Speaking of speculation, let's consider your following statements:

Pure speculation. What if, what if...

Forget about what if, let's go with what we know and what was widely reported when Williams signed HHF: Williams signed HHF as co-#1 driver. He had the same equipment as JV and the same opportunity.

The fact that he did not have the same result as JV means nothing, he had the EXACT SAME opportunity. That is in direct contrast to the #2 drivers at Ferrari who, by contract, must be subservient to Schumacher.

How is that any different...

...from this?

You asked when the last time two drivers from the same team went head to head for the title. I answered your question. What is your point??

I guess you must be the real insider then, since you apparently know the inner workings of the Williams, McLaren, Renault and Ferrari teams.

Hey, you wouldn't happen to be Bernie Ecclestone, would you?!?

 

Considering that this was the only occurance of this "gentleman's agreement" I think it was just an excuse. DC has been quoted as saying somthing to the effect of, "Mika has had the support of the team for the drivers championship, now it's my turn". Or, "I hope I get that chance next year" etc. Sounds to me like Mclaren actually doesn't want the idea of driver favoritism appearent, whilst Ferrari just didn't care.

 

McLaren's official policy is that the drivers race each other until such time as one of them is mathematically eliminated from contention. At that point, that driver is expected to support the other driver who is still challenging for the title. The "gentleman's agreement" about the overtaking maneuver at this race was pretty widely reported at the time. I don't think there is any confusion about that. In fact, that this obvious relinquishment of the lead was the only time it occured at McLaren supports my contention that the team did not favor one driver over the other, otherwise we would have seen many more such events.

DC, by the way, was pretty well known for saying that next season would be his year throughout his McLaren career. I never took it seriously and I don't think too many other folks did either. It is a common statement by the slower driver of any team to claim the other driver was shown favoritism, sure beats the hell out of having to admit that you are simply a slower driver.

 

Alright, you've convinced me. On to the next debate...who was the more talented driver? The Red Baron or The Flying Finn? You have to break it down to different categories. Personally, I think it goes like this...

Qualifying: Hakkinen
Overtaking: Hakkinen
Consistency: Schumacher
Technical knowlege/car development: I'm not sure here, maybe Schumacher.
Clean racing: Hakkinen
Fitness: Schumacher
Overall race performance: Schumacher

your take?

 

Schumi in NASCAR would be like Bill Gates working in a CompUSA.

 

I understand what you are saying. I do some mountain climbing myself and I know how a beautiful day can turn into a fatal one very quickly, and you have to be smart and not stubborn to abort a climb. But you can't drive scared and win. F1 is no Sunday drive either, so I find MS's comments puzzling. I enjoy track events but I know I could never succeed at racing because of fear of wrecking. Oval drivers can't accelerate off a corner and slide to within inches of walls at 200mph if they are afraid of the wall. And they do it hundreds of times every race. Obviously, skill and confidence come into play, but every oval driver knows he will hit the wall many times in his career and yet still get max acceleration and miss by inches 99.99% of the time. All forms of pro racing, though much improved, are still dangerous, so I am puzzled why danger would keep MS from other forms of racing. It just doesn't nake sense, yet he has said it at least twice.

DAve

 

And you actually expect them to say anything else otherwise?!

Are we not all speculating here? You bet that I am speculating, because I was not there and I am not part of any F1 team. Oh wait, I forget, you were standing right there in the pits next to either Ron Dennis or Frank William when they made all the decisions. I am sure your inputs were invaluable to both of them.

Again, no contracts or agreements that we know of, does it mean that the team principles won't tell one to move over for another? Heck no!!! Oh wait again, I forget that since they came out in public and denied it then it must be true too.

What I asked was when was the last time 2 drivers from the same team was allowed to race each other when a 3rd driver from another team is waiting in the wing to take over the series? In other words, when both drivers within the same team are allowed to race each other fully with no team orders was only when there is no risk of the team losing either the WDC or the WCC to someone else as in the case of 1996. In 1996, MS and Ferrari were far from being on par with the Williams. They are not even close to challenging the mighty Williams, nobody was. The two drivers were so clear of everyone else that they can afford to race each other for the title because there was none else within the striking distances, but that doesn't mean a team order does not exist. As a long time viewer, I am sure you remember that Hill was so well liked by the team, that Adrian Newy left Williams because he felt that Frank William was wrong in not renewing Hill's contract at the end of his title winning year. If MS or anyone else had been challenging in 1996, do you really think he will not set who is #1 and who is #2? who do you think Frank Williams will protect and set as #1? Do you actually think that he will take the chance on a rookie in JV over a more established DH?

*L* You are the one here stating that you KNOW everything for certain, without mistakes and nothing you ever said was speculation as they are all facts. And now you are pointing fingers at me?? Classic Transference if anyone ever ask to see one.

Talking to you is like talking to a wall, and I am sure the feeling is mutual. Thus furthering this discussion is pointless.

 

DC has something on his resume that MH, MS, KR, FA and 99.99% of the people on the face of the Earth can't say....

 

Hey Anthony C. and Senna3xWC thanks to both of you guys for keeping it clean without any name calling and both giving excellent opinions. That is the beauty of this debate, everybody has good opinions and doesn't make childish remarks.

By the way Chase the comment of Bill Gates working at Comp USA was hilarious. See Andreas how much better it is with Adults on this website rather than a certain putz that used to be on here.

 

Amen to that brother

 

We would have known all this for sure if MS hadn't vetoed Mika as his teammate.....................

 

Sucked so much he won 7 races in 6 years..............

 

Is that really even an issue?

 

which he never did.

 

+1

 

Not according to a few publications. Ferrari wanted to try to lure Mika out of retirement or something to that effect. Someone said no, gee i wonder who. I believe, and correct me if i'm wrong that it was in the article posted in the thread titled the story behind MS's retirement. I tired to find the link but the link doesn't work. Does anyone still have it?

 

It's fun to debate, some people have strong opinions supporting either driver.

 

Well. were looking at a driver who took Benetton from being sub top (at best) to back to back titles in 4 seasons and who gave Ferrari an amazing streak of success in both the driverchampionship as the constructorchampionship after more than twenty years of no title whatsoever (not counting the constructorstitle in 82) and a driver who needed much much more than that to get a topteam with more than sufficient resources their fair share of winnings.

Agreed, it is no straight comparison, but any claim that Hakkinen was an overall better driver than M. Schumacher seems far less backed up than the claim the other way around.

 

I think I read somewhere that IF the current points structure were in effect in 1999-again "IF"-Irvine would have been WDC.

Mika was a good driver but he was not in the class of MS, AS, AP, etc.