Schumacher should go for 'ten' Michael Schumacher should prolong retirement for a year and go for a 'perfect ten,' according to friend and Ferrari technical director Ross Brawn. The burly Briton told UK publication 'People' that an unbeatable tally of ten drivers' championships would be 'the icing on the cake.' But Schumacher, 36 in January, is only contracted at Ferrari to the end of 2006, making nine titles the maximum possible. Brawn said: "(Michael) will wake up one day and know that he has had enough. We'll accept that. It won't be too hard to fill his place -- we'd be able to choose. Kimi Raikkonen and Fernando Alonso would be the drivers we'd look at."
I think Schumacher will sign a one or two year deal to finish with a "perfect ten." I would. Immortality is rare. He can relax for the rest of his life. Forza, Cavallini
I think Schumacher should do what is best for Schumacher. I do not doubt his abilities to go on for another 3 or 4 years, which would be fantastic!!! But, he may decide to retire and that is his decisions and only his, no one elses. One thing is for sure. There will never be another F1 driver as great as Michael regardless of the number of titles he wins.
For sure? Very debatable IMO. Many people consider Senna as good, if not better than Michael. Not to mention some of the driver from many decades ago.
I concur ... the greatest is highly subjective based on your age, the period of F1 you were watching/reading about, etc. No doubt that Michael is in the all-time top 5 but I dont think he is the best... My All-time Top 5: 1. Tazio Nuvolari 2. Juan Manuel Fangio 3. Rudolf Caracciola 4. Michael Schumacher 5. Ayrton Senna
An interesting quote, sounds like Ferrari is taking continued success for granted... And making significant changes to their engineering process at the same time! Sounds like they're getting a little over-confident... I'll take bets on when the Fall of Ferrari happens, rather than if Schumacher settles for 9 or goes for 10!
Same old comparisson between drivers of different times.... Michael against the drivers he competes with is the only valid comparison IMHO. And he beat them SEVEN times! Nobody has done that before. Maybe nobody ever will, who knows. Statistically he's the all time great (yeah, yeah, bring on the Stirling Moss arguement!)
Greatest driver? Who really knows. But, I don't think anyone else will ever achieve what he has. I think we're witnessing something akin to "a perfect storm" that will more than likely never happen again.
Hell No wouldn't do that how bout Phil Hill... Had to argue and fight to get SEATBELTS installed in the Ferrari... Different world Different gauges of what worked. Michael has been remarkable there is not a argument but he has not had any major injuries other than his leg a couple of years ago. These guys in the old days did more with a lot less so the point is moot.
It's a good question. But Senna had Prost as a foil. Those two had epic battles. Whos does Schumi have these day, we thought it was going to be raidonen two years ago. Who is Schumi's real competition?
The point bigodino is trying to make is that is impossible to compare the drivers. No one can say for sure how Michael would have done if he had to drive the cars from the past. Maybe he would have been a success, maybe he wouldnt. Maybe Phil Hill would not be able to dirve these new cars, maybe he could, who knows. Its impossible to compare the drivers. As bigodino said, the only real comparison that can be made is between the present drivers and cars. The thing that sets Michael apart from other drivers, IMO, is his contribution level to the development of the car. Simply put, he is a genius. So many people say that much of Michaels success is due to the car, and forget that he significantly helped make cars such as the F2004 what they are. I dont want to take the light away from Ferrari. Obvious the engineers, designers, mechanics, etc, etc, deserve most of the credit for the cars. But the point remains that no other driver has influenced the advancements in formula 1 cars as much as Michael (the last one obviously being the F2004, perhaps the best formula 1 car ever made (statistically speaking))
Einstein was a Genius. Michael Schumacher drives race cars. Genius is a term so over-used today it has no meaning. For my own curiosity and lack of knowledge on the subject, what specifically has Michael done in terms of designing the cars? I'm sure he puts in a lot of testing and feedback, but what did he create?
This may all be a moot point if he retires after 2005. I don't have anything to back it up, but if he announced he was finished after next year I wouldn't be at all surprised. What else does he have to prove? He'll probably have 8 WDCs and 90-odd wins. His records will be untouchable for at least a decade, maybe forever. He has been very lucky for most of his career. Had his broken leg in '99 happened last year, he would called it quits IMO. In '99 he was still chasing his first championship for Ferrari. That accident could have very easily been much more injurious to him. Remember the tire failure he had a few months ago in testing? Freak things like that can get a person thinking about luck and life, or the lack of both. No doubt driving past his brother's broken body on a stretcher at Indy gave him some time to think as well. Brawn probably hopes he drives through 2007, but I think Schumacher may have other plans. Like kicking back with a few hundred million dollars, playing with his kids, and hanging out with his family and friends.
I agree. I think the worst culprit for calling people geniuses is Charlie Sheen. In interviews when he is asked about people he has worked with, he calls them all geniuses! About what Michael has created... nothing. He tells people what should be improved and what he wants to be able to do in the car(e.g. handling, in-car adjustable setup, steering wheel functionality, layout, ergonomics, etc), but the engineers and mechanics actually come up with how to create what Michael wants for the car. The whole point of this is creating a car which will win races and ultimately the championship, and the engineers and mechanics need the feedback of the driver to know what to create; because despite their theoretical knowledge of how the car works and handles, it'll never replace the actual feedback from the driver who will be the one that has to race it. In the end, the better the car is suited to the driver, the better the chances he'll be able to make the most of its potential and score a better result.
hope not! an epic struggle between a skipper's ship and the insurmountable forces of mother nature, based on a true story... erm like no-one made it back to tell what happened, so as far as i'm concerned, 4 guys went out fishing and didn't come back. anything else is pretty much fabricated. years later i'm still annoyed at that movie, but i digress...
You're annoyed at the story line while my father is annoyed because "No competent helicopter pilot would ever of got caught by that wave, that helicopter can snap-climb out of the way of that wave so quickly its ridiculous" For some reason I remember his comments about that movie more than the movie itself. Though I think senna was thinking about Ferrari's simply superior cars and a driver like Michael happening at the same time resulting in a perfect storm sweeping through F1 racking up trophies for Ferrari and Michael
Yes I agree ... in the end a bad analogy as the 'Perfect Storm' film was a complete piece of **** ... like any film that George Clooney is in! Pete
Senna would whoop the german's arse. But that would mean some battles around the track and from the garbage that spouts forth from most Shumi supporters here the last thing any of you want is a schumi victory that didn't involve being on pole a second faster than the rest of the field and then winning by at least 45 seconds having never had to defend the lead (heaven forbid).
And what exactly do you base this conclusion on? Information from your psychic friends? Or are you really Buddha, God, Ala, Zeus or Odin? Facts are: 1. You can not compare athletes from one era to another. Unless you are some type of diety or demi-god. If that is the case, I hope you go over to SE Asia and help out instead of wasting your time here on FerrariChat. 2. We all have our favorite driver and there is no need to "defend" your driver. And no, mine is not MS, mine is JMF. And before any one you start to defend AS again, just to remind you that there was a few other "okay" drivers before AS. Drivers like Jimmy Clark, Niki Lauda and Gill Villenuve etc. Oh yea, there is that little French dude too.....what's his name? Alain something Prost. 3. Senna is gone, has been gone since 1994. No matter what the cause is, so face the reality, he was an amazing driver, one of the best drivers in his days and should be one of the top 10 in F1 history. But the fact is, Senna is gone and there is no way he will be able to win 10 WDC as many of the diehard Senna fans love to claim that he could. Not even if you all live in the State of California and decides to clone him from a hair found in his driving suit, the clone is still never going to be the real Ayrton Senna. As I believe that titles are not transferable from one person to one or more clones. My point is, claiming how drivers from different era are better, faster and quicker than another is simply....IDIOTIC. Anyone with a half decent understanding of what autoracing is can tell you that. It may be fun, but it is unrealistic and most of all, don't make it so personal.
Hmmm, I have read this over and over and it just does not fly. Be it this pair or any other in F1 history (or F-chat history!) it is hard to campare any groups or single drivers in their prime. Your assumption would indicate that ALL the other drivers suddenly turned to crap when MS showed up and I do not buy it. In that same vein I could make the aurgument that compared to MS, Senna and Prost were just average drivers. We all know that to be false as they were exceptional drivers. But if they were racing today, would they be battling to be the best of the rest? We will never know! But we will all have our favs and there is no way to ever make the comparison. And THAT, my friends, is what makes all this bench racing so much fun! Now to address the Aventino issue. It is obvious this clod has either not read any of our posts (all us racing whores!), because as you all know - we all crave the wheel to wheel. OR, he is just another Urine Problum Moantoya troll trying to stir it up. Regardless, he does not have a clue and is not contributing to the discussion. Aventino, take your right hand and make a fist. Now, point your index finger straight up and hold your thumb out at 90 degrees. Got it? Ok, now hold that up to your forehead and walk around the rest of the day like that. Guaranteed to get a date.... Jim Jim
All of you should read the new "Ferrari Formula 1, Under the Skin of the Championship Winning F1-2000" book by Peter Wright. Read between the lines, Ferrari is set up to dominate until McLaren and BMW-Williams really change the way they do business. I don't see the order changing much in 2005.
Indeed but I am also not talking about manipulating a team and screwing with the #2 driver. I am simply talking about two drivers with equal access to setup and support and on the day Senna will be quicker. Now if MS can force Senna's pitcrew to fumble a bit with the pit stop etc or have the refueling bowser illegally modified like MS had at Benetton and throw another 5 or 10 seconds into the mix then Senna won't be quicker. But if we are talking man against man, identical machinery, MS would loose.
