planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:00 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

What is your Favorite Era?
Pre-historic 1%  1%  [ 1 ]
50s 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
60s 9%  9%  [ 7 ]
70s 12%  12%  [ 10 ]
80s 23%  23%  [ 19 ]
90s 30%  30%  [ 24 ]
00s 16%  16%  [ 13 ]
10s 9%  9%  [ 7 ]
Total votes : 81
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Exediron wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyway, regarding Vettel vs Webber, these were the predictions back in 2008:
https://forums.autosport.com/topic/1026 ... -v-webber/

Some entertaining reading in there. The Terrible Prediction Award of 2008, however, goes to this one:

Quote:
Vettel's been struggling to contain his rookie teammate this year: he'll be crushed like a bug by Webber next year.

Nope!

Can't wait until we get to do a Vettel vs. Leclerc prediction thread. I wonder if it'll be as wrong as the Ricciardo vs. Vettel thread was?

EDIT: Here's the Vettel v Ricciardo thread, for those curious: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9679

I think my take was that Ricciardo would trouble Vettel in qualifying so not too bad, Vettel would beat Ricciardo convincingly in the races, so wrong, also Vettel would be much better than Ricciardo in the wet, again not so bad.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Johnson wrote:
The problem with Vettel is all we have is the three team mates. We have Bourdais too but we don’t have a great gauge of his level (Buemi also beat him by a similar level to Vettel did).

Vettel was clearly better than Webber and Raikkonen but both were 33-39 years old when teamed with him and arguably number 2 or at least less favoured from day 1. The Ricciardo year was just 1 year. Vettel could be very good (top 25 of all time) or great (top 10 of all time). Hopefully he pairs with a strong young driver in the next year or two. Leclerc for example.


So to be clear Alonso beating Raikkonen, who Vettel beat by same or better margin the following year is not representative, now Raikkonen is old.

Vettel in the history books of F1 right now has got just two people in front of him with regards WDC, and by the end of the season might just be his childhood hero.

In any sport all you need do is rack up the glory and prize the sport has to offer every other thing will be speculation of the fan boys the record books never lie nor is it sentimental.

As per the Leclerc challenge that one has to be a joke, but as always it's not new since its Vettel the goal post will move saying its because he's established in the team.

Alonso beat Kimi more convincingly than Vettel did.


Can you back this up with stats?

I believe myself and some others already went through this with you and your understanding of numbers was lets say a bit eye opening.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Last edited by pokerman on Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Blake wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Since '10 it's been between Vettel and Hamilton winning the title except Rosberg, also its just nostalgia that makes people think the guys from the past are better than guys today.


I disagree on a couple of points... You have chosen to leave out Alonso, who I would rate above both Vettel and Hamilton.

Secondly, you dismiss ratings of drivers from the past as "nostalgia",... I could suggest that the strong forum ratings of today's drivers are made by those who never had the chance to experience the "guys from the past". As always, it is difficult to compare eras, but your basic dismissal of drivers of the past is, in my opinion, unfair and somewhat uninformed.


For me what determines is the world title anything else is subjective, in sport you don't luck into being a serial winner, it's the reason I left Alonso out. If this era is written about in future Alonso will just be a footnote in it, its the reality.

The nostalgia part comes in for driver like Senna, because of tragedy its elevated him a lot same as John Lennon with regards to The Beatles.

I think most people that say this were not even around when Senna raced.


Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6264
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Blake wrote:

I disagree on a couple of points... You have chosen to leave out Alonso, who I would rate above both Vettel and Hamilton.

Secondly, you dismiss ratings of drivers from the past as "nostalgia",... I could suggest that the strong forum ratings of today's drivers are made by those who never had the chance to experience the "guys from the past". As always, it is difficult to compare eras, but your basic dismissal of drivers of the past is, in my opinion, unfair and somewhat uninformed.


For me what determines is the world title anything else is subjective, in sport you don't luck into being a serial winner, it's the reason I left Alonso out. If this era is written about in future Alonso will just be a footnote in it, its the reality.

The nostalgia part comes in for driver like Senna, because of tragedy its elevated him a lot same as John Lennon with regards to The Beatles.

I think most people that say this were not even around when Senna raced.


Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
For me what determines is the world title anything else is subjective, in sport you don't luck into being a serial winner, it's the reason I left Alonso out. If this era is written about in future Alonso will just be a footnote in it, its the reality.

The nostalgia part comes in for driver like Senna, because of tragedy its elevated him a lot same as John Lennon with regards to The Beatles.

I think most people that say this were not even around when Senna raced.


Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4770
KingVoid wrote:
Trulli beat Alonso 16-15 in qualifying, so he couldn’t have been too bad. ;)

Anyway, regarding Vettel vs Webber, these were the predictions back in 2008:
https://forums.autosport.com/topic/1026 ... -v-webber/

Everyone expected Webber to win qualifying, such was his reputation at the time.

This post nailed it though:
Quote:
Webber and Trulli are some of the best qualifiers, if Vettel can beat Webber in qualifying he may become a great driver, especially considering his age, he's 10 years yunger.

I liked this one...
Quote:
Vettel will RETIRE the old neverhasbeen, most overrated, F1 RACING driver ever.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 484
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

Much as I did watch Senna and think he is right at the top of talents ever in F1 I don't think this is a fair comparison.
I'd say it was easier (not easy but possible) back then to drive around cars more, whereas that just isn't possible with this generation.

One thing I do know is I'm friend with an ex Hart employee who has told me stories of what Senna could do with that engine that others would have blown it trying; as I say back then possible but no way these modern ones will let you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6264
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think most people that say this were not even around when Senna raced.


Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.


And if you considered all the work Senna had done for the poor people in Brazil through charities you'd know why he was given a state funeral. Not that you are wrong, the biggest star of F1 was Senna at the time of his death.

Also, Rockie didn't say MSC would have definitely beat Senna, he said "had Senna lived and MSC beat him" that year, to me it reads as "if that happened", not that it would happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6264
RaggedMan wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Trulli beat Alonso 16-15 in qualifying, so he couldn’t have been too bad. ;)

Anyway, regarding Vettel vs Webber, these were the predictions back in 2008:
https://forums.autosport.com/topic/1026 ... -v-webber/

Everyone expected Webber to win qualifying, such was his reputation at the time.

This post nailed it though:
Quote:
Webber and Trulli are some of the best qualifiers, if Vettel can beat Webber in qualifying he may become a great driver, especially considering his age, he's 10 years yunger.

I liked this one...
Quote:
Vettel will RETIRE the old neverhasbeen, most overrated, F1 RACING driver ever.


We should have a list of these!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


Except you consider F1 entertainment like Americas got talent, in any sport the only metric that matters is what you have won, the rest is subjective and the opinion of the person having the discussion.

You might want to ask Ronaldo how he felt till he matched Messi's Ballon d'Or tally, even Alonso now realises having the success is the most important thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6264
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


Except you consider F1 entertainment like Americas got talent, in any sport the only metric that matters is what you have won, the rest is subjective and the opinion of the person having the discussion.

You might want to ask Ronaldo how he felt till he matched Messi's Ballon d'Or tally, even Alonso now realises having the success is the most important thing.


I was watching Schumacher's last interview where the journo was telling him that if he had stayed one more year he would have had Ruben's record of the most GP's. And his reply reminded me of yours above, that he preferred to have the ones for success!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:34 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13746
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


Except you consider F1 entertainment like Americas got talent, in any sport the only metric that matters is what you have won, the rest is subjective and the opinion of the person having the discussion.

You might want to ask Ronaldo how he felt till he matched Messi's Ballon d'Or tally, even Alonso now realises having the success is the most important thing.


Depends what you're trying to establish. Most successful? perhaps, best? no. Using your own analogy Luca Toni has won more world cups than Messi but nobody would argue he's the better player.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:

For me what determines is the world title anything else is subjective, in sport you don't luck into being a serial winner, it's the reason I left Alonso out. If this era is written about in future Alonso will just be a footnote in it, its the reality.

The nostalgia part comes in for driver like Senna, because of tragedy its elevated him a lot same as John Lennon with regards to The Beatles.

I think most people that say this were not even around when Senna raced.


Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?


Exactly many thanks for putting it out there, Pokerman tends to make up things in his mind and respond to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.


The state funeral he got was not because he was the biggest star in F1, but because of how Brazil at the time was charmed by him, Senna wasn't a nobody who got rich through F1, Senna was the kind of person who captured the minds and heart of everyone even outside of F1 through philanthropy.

Senna was going to the fastest car in Williams and nothing else, it's not something that was impossible for anyone else to do lets get real, for him to win the championship again he had to be in the Williams.

When Senna was in the Mclaren and beating others, I'm guessing it was a worse car than the others? the kind of ridiculous arguments you come up with though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


Except you consider F1 entertainment like Americas got talent, in any sport the only metric that matters is what you have won, the rest is subjective and the opinion of the person having the discussion.

You might want to ask Ronaldo how he felt till he matched Messi's Ballon d'Or tally, even Alonso now realises having the success is the most important thing.


Depends what you're trying to establish. Most successful? perhaps, best? no. Using your own analogy Luca Toni has won more world cups than Messi but nobody would argue he's the better player.


Lol innocuous arguments like this make me chuckle.

I used Ballon d 'Or for a reason, also had Messi decided to play for Spain and not Argentina we won't even be having this discussion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
Siao7 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


Except you consider F1 entertainment like Americas got talent, in any sport the only metric that matters is what you have won, the rest is subjective and the opinion of the person having the discussion.

You might want to ask Ronaldo how he felt till he matched Messi's Ballon d'Or tally, even Alonso now realises having the success is the most important thing.


I was watching Schumacher's last interview where the journo was telling him that if he had stayed one more year he would have had Ruben's record of the most GP's. And his reply reminded me of yours above, that he preferred to have the ones for success!


Exactly in any sport it's always about the wins it's what you will be judged on, it's no coincidence in this era that Vettel and Hamilton always find themselves in quick cars.

I mean Vettel replaced Alonso at Ferrari, and look where both are today, whatever Alonso didn't see in Ferrari Vettel saw it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.


And if you considered all the work Senna had done for the poor people in Brazil through charities you'd know why he was given a state funeral. Not that you are wrong, the biggest star of F1 was Senna at the time of his death.

Also, Rockie didn't say MSC would have definitely beat Senna, he said "had Senna lived and MSC beat him" that year, to me it reads as "if that happened", not that it would happen.

Like I said Senna's reputation was already secured, what may have happened against Schumacher is immaterial but bare in mind more often that not Senna would have had the best car and at the point he died he was out qualifying Schumacher in an inferior car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

The internet doesn't allow you to live through it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
For me what determines is the world title anything else is subjective, in sport you don't luck into being a serial winner, it's the reason I left Alonso out. If this era is written about in future Alonso will just be a footnote in it, its the reality.

The nostalgia part comes in for driver like Senna, because of tragedy its elevated him a lot same as John Lennon with regards to The Beatles.

I think most people that say this were not even around when Senna raced.


Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

The post said if Schumacher beat Senna how would he be viewed then?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

Were their teammates 4-time WDCs considered to be the best driver in the sport prior to being teamed with them? The only reason you are making the argument that you are is to try to take away from what Senna was as a driver by suggesting that it's blown out of proportion because of his death. I call BS on that as I watched his career and he was every bit as great as he's remembered. It's sad how some people feel the need to tear someone down in order to prop up others. You can speak about Vettel being a great driver without having to try to take away from other greats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6264
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.


And if you considered all the work Senna had done for the poor people in Brazil through charities you'd know why he was given a state funeral. Not that you are wrong, the biggest star of F1 was Senna at the time of his death.

Also, Rockie didn't say MSC would have definitely beat Senna, he said "had Senna lived and MSC beat him" that year, to me it reads as "if that happened", not that it would happen.

Like I said Senna's reputation was already secured, what may have happened against Schumacher is immaterial but bare in mind more often that not Senna would have had the best car and at the point he died he was out qualifying Schumacher in an inferior car.


That's what I wrote to you, that he was already considered a great. You are seemingly just repeating what has been said from the beginning.

What may have happened if Senna hadn't died is a different thing altogether. Rockie presented a hypothetical scenario that Senna would not have died, then made his case that maybe his reputation wouldn't have been as high as it is now, especially if he lost to MSC. Instead of dying in the height of his driving career, imagine if he continued well into his late 30's and losing to the younger and hungrier drivers. It surely wouldn't have helped his reputation in this hypothetical scenario. The possibility of this scenario is not important here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.

Like I said you sound like you never even saw Senna race at the time.

Senna was 34 when he died and a 3 time WDC and feted by many as the best or for some just the fastest driver in F1, when Schumacher won his first 2 titles his main competition was Hill a driver half a second slower than Senna, I recall that Hll won the title against Schumacher in 1996.


We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.


The state funeral he got was not because he was the biggest star in F1, but because of how Brazil at the time was charmed by him, Senna wasn't a nobody who got rich through F1, Senna was the kind of person who captured the minds and heart of everyone even outside of F1 through philanthropy.

Senna was going to the fastest car in Williams and nothing else, it's not something that was impossible for anyone else to do lets get real, for him to win the championship again he had to be in the Williams.

When Senna was in the Mclaren and beating others, I'm guessing it was a worse car than the others? the kind of ridiculous arguments you come up with though.

Senna was able to walk into the fastest cars like Fangio did, Fangio was considered a great whilst Senna needed to be killed for that accolade it seems?

Also if you want to pull drivers careers apart Schumacher didn't start winning titles for Ferrari until they gave him the best car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1501
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

The internet doesn't allow you to live through it.


Probably if you don't understand how to use it.

I suspect you lived through Fangio racing or Novulari thats why you know about it.

As a fan in my 40's I lived through it, so try another line mate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Rockie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


Except you consider F1 entertainment like Americas got talent, in any sport the only metric that matters is what you have won, the rest is subjective and the opinion of the person having the discussion.

You might want to ask Ronaldo how he felt till he matched Messi's Ballon d'Or tally, even Alonso now realises having the success is the most important thing.


I was watching Schumacher's last interview where the journo was telling him that if he had stayed one more year he would have had Ruben's record of the most GP's. And his reply reminded me of yours above, that he preferred to have the ones for success!


Exactly in any sport it's always about the wins it's what you will be judged on, it's no coincidence in this era that Vettel and Hamilton always find themselves in quick cars.

I mean Vettel replaced Alonso at Ferrari, and look where both are today, whatever Alonso didn't see in Ferrari Vettel saw it.

So some drivers get credit for being in the best cars whilst others don't?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
sandman1347 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

Were their teammates 4-time WDCs considered to be the best driver in the sport prior to being teamed with them? The only reason you are making the argument that you are is to try to take away from what Senna was as a driver by suggesting that it's blown out of proportion because of his death. I call BS on that as I watched his career and he was every bit as great as he's remembered. It's sad how some people feel the need to tear someone down in order to prop up others. You can speak about Vettel being a great driver without having to try to take away from other greats.

Indeed with Vettel in mind which great driver has he ever beaten in the same car?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6287
Location: Nebraska, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Tragedy enhances reputation, had Senna lived and MSC beat him he wont have the reputation he has.

In the height of one's career if tragedy strikes it elevates the individual to demigod like level.


Judging how good a driver is based largely on championships won is a folly. If Vettel's engine had blown on the last lap at Interlagos in 2012 he would have the same amount of championships as Alonso but it wouldn't make either of them better or wors. Same as Massa wouldn't be any better a driver if the rain had held off and Hamilton hadn't been able to pass Glock.


True they wouldn't have been any better a driver because of the WDC, but you have to admit that public opinion would have changed in most cases. Rockie also makes a valid point in his "tragedy enhances reputation" if struck down in the height of one's career. I see it in Senna and in Dale Earnhardt Sr. for example. It may not be fair, but I think that there is truth in it. Dale Earnhardt is frequently listed as the greatest NASCAR driver of all time, yet Richard Petty who, with Dale, is the only 7x Cup champion, who has 7 Daytona 500 wins to one for Dale, and is the only driver with 200 wins (the next highest is 105, Dale had 76 I think) ... but Petty is usually relegated to 2nd at best, or is left out of some imaginary "new era) even though he and Dale competed against each other for several years before Petty retired.

You mention Massa, how differently might the majority of F1 fans look at Massa's career if he had even 1 WDC to his list of accomplishments? How would that have affected a number of perceptions, of Massa and of some other drivers?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
We had this argument before in this forum, many times. And it always comes to this. No one is claiming that his death gave him his status. Senna was unique, and one has to be blind not to see this. What people have been saying is that his death tends to elevate his ALREADY high status. I can't talk on Rockie's behalf, but it reads like this to me: "tragedy enhances the reputation". It's not that it creates it, it just complements it, tends to elevate it even more.

As for the last sentence, you must be having a laugh secretly. Are you comparing the Williams of '96 to the Ferrari of that year? It's like saying that Hamilton won the title against Alonso in 2017. Not really valid argument given the cars differences, is it?

Well the poster seems to be giving credence to the fact that Schumacher would have beat Senna perhaps on the evidence that Schumacher was beating Senna at the time of his death, perhaps looking over the fact that Schumacher had the better car?

Senna's standing in the sport was that he was able to walk into the Williams team at the expense of it's incumbent champion Prost, he also was given a state funeral, this isn't a case of nostalgia blowing things out of proportion, this was the death of the biggest star in F1 at that time.


And if you considered all the work Senna had done for the poor people in Brazil through charities you'd know why he was given a state funeral. Not that you are wrong, the biggest star of F1 was Senna at the time of his death.

Also, Rockie didn't say MSC would have definitely beat Senna, he said "had Senna lived and MSC beat him" that year, to me it reads as "if that happened", not that it would happen.

Like I said Senna's reputation was already secured, what may have happened against Schumacher is immaterial but bare in mind more often that not Senna would have had the best car and at the point he died he was out qualifying Schumacher in an inferior car.


That's what I wrote to you, that he was already considered a great. You are seemingly just repeating what has been said from the beginning.

What may have happened if Senna hadn't died is a different thing altogether. Rockie presented a hypothetical scenario that Senna would not have died, then made his case that maybe his reputation wouldn't have been as high as it is now, especially if he lost to MSC. Instead of dying in the height of his driving career, imagine if he continued well into his late 30's and losing to the younger and hungrier drivers. It surely wouldn't have helped his reputation in this hypothetical scenario. The possibility of this scenario is not important here.

That's a bit like saying what would have happened to Senna's reputation if he had forgotten to drive fast, what would have happened to Schumacher's reputation if Senna had lived and beaten him, the suggestion seems to be that this could only have been a one way street so a judgement basically is already being made by people who believe that Schumacher was better.

I think people make allowances for drivers that go over the hill, it happened for Schumacher after all.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6287
Location: Nebraska, USA
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

That's what I wrote to you, that he was already considered a great. You are seemingly just repeating what has been said from the beginning.

What may have happened if Senna hadn't died is a different thing altogether. Rockie presented a hypothetical scenario that Senna would not have died, then made his case that maybe his reputation wouldn't have been as high as it is now, especially if he lost to MSC. Instead of dying in the height of his driving career, imagine if he continued well into his late 30's and losing to the younger and hungrier drivers. It surely wouldn't have helped his reputation in this hypothetical scenario. The possibility of this scenario is not important here.

That's a bit like saying what would have happened to Senna's reputation if he had forgotten to drive fast, what would have happened to Schumacher's reputation if Senna had lived and beaten him, the suggestion seems to be that this could only have been a one way street so a judgement basically is already being made by people who believe that Schumacher was better.

I think people make allowances for drivers that go over the hill, it happened for Schumacher after all.


Do they, poker? I often see people in this forum use the three years that Schumi came back from retirement to bash his legacy... if you are honest you have seen them too. Since Rockie and Siao are talking hypotheticals their discussion is valid. Personally, I believe that Senna had lived, he was going to have a very tough time with young Schumi and while many say that Senna's early passing stopped him from winning two more WDCs, I don't think it would have happened.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

The internet doesn't allow you to live through it.


Probably if you don't understand how to use it.

I suspect you lived through Fangio racing or Novulari thats why you know about it.

As a fan in my 40's I lived through it, so try another line mate.

So you was little more than 6 years old when Senna made his F1 debut.

I know very little about any racing before the 80's and wouldn't dream of getting into a counter argument against the likes of Blake because I happened to glean some knowledge from the internet.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:05 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13746
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

That's what I wrote to you, that he was already considered a great. You are seemingly just repeating what has been said from the beginning.

What may have happened if Senna hadn't died is a different thing altogether. Rockie presented a hypothetical scenario that Senna would not have died, then made his case that maybe his reputation wouldn't have been as high as it is now, especially if he lost to MSC. Instead of dying in the height of his driving career, imagine if he continued well into his late 30's and losing to the younger and hungrier drivers. It surely wouldn't have helped his reputation in this hypothetical scenario. The possibility of this scenario is not important here.

That's a bit like saying what would have happened to Senna's reputation if he had forgotten to drive fast, what would have happened to Schumacher's reputation if Senna had lived and beaten him, the suggestion seems to be that this could only have been a one way street so a judgement basically is already being made by people who believe that Schumacher was better.

I think people make allowances for drivers that go over the hill, it happened for Schumacher after all.


Do they, poker? I often see people in this forum use the three years that Schumi came back from retirement to bash his legacy... if you are honest you have seen them too. Since Rockie and Siao are talking hypotheticals their discussion is valid. Personally, I believe that Senna had lived, he was going to have a very tough time with young Schumi and while many say that Senna's early passing stopped him from winning two more WDCs, I don't think it would have happened.


Quite possibly with a small minority getting beaten by Schumacher would have effected Senna's legacy. Schumacher's a good example. In most people's eyes getting beat by Alonso to the 06 championship at the end of his first career did little to detract from his overall standing. I think most people put their top 5 (greatest) as Clark, Fangio, Prost, Schumacher, Senna. I don't think Senna would've dropped out of that big 5 had he lived.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

That's what I wrote to you, that he was already considered a great. You are seemingly just repeating what has been said from the beginning.

What may have happened if Senna hadn't died is a different thing altogether. Rockie presented a hypothetical scenario that Senna would not have died, then made his case that maybe his reputation wouldn't have been as high as it is now, especially if he lost to MSC. Instead of dying in the height of his driving career, imagine if he continued well into his late 30's and losing to the younger and hungrier drivers. It surely wouldn't have helped his reputation in this hypothetical scenario. The possibility of this scenario is not important here.

That's a bit like saying what would have happened to Senna's reputation if he had forgotten to drive fast, what would have happened to Schumacher's reputation if Senna had lived and beaten him, the suggestion seems to be that this could only have been a one way street so a judgement basically is already being made by people who believe that Schumacher was better.

I think people make allowances for drivers that go over the hill, it happened for Schumacher after all.


Do they, poker? I often see people in this forum use the three years that Schumi came back from retirement to bash his legacy... if you are honest you have seen them too. Since Rockie and Siao are talking hypotheticals their discussion is valid. Personally, I believe that Senna had lived, he was going to have a very tough time with young Schumi and while many say that Senna's early passing stopped him from winning two more WDCs, I don't think it would have happened.

Rosberg got no credit whatsoever for beating Schumacher because of his age.

If Senna had lived Schumacher would have a much harder time than beating the likes of Hill, Hill and Villenueve both won titles against Schumacher but Senna would have struggled?

All I'm really reading is that I think one driver is better than the other.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
mikeyg123 wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

That's what I wrote to you, that he was already considered a great. You are seemingly just repeating what has been said from the beginning.

What may have happened if Senna hadn't died is a different thing altogether. Rockie presented a hypothetical scenario that Senna would not have died, then made his case that maybe his reputation wouldn't have been as high as it is now, especially if he lost to MSC. Instead of dying in the height of his driving career, imagine if he continued well into his late 30's and losing to the younger and hungrier drivers. It surely wouldn't have helped his reputation in this hypothetical scenario. The possibility of this scenario is not important here.

That's a bit like saying what would have happened to Senna's reputation if he had forgotten to drive fast, what would have happened to Schumacher's reputation if Senna had lived and beaten him, the suggestion seems to be that this could only have been a one way street so a judgement basically is already being made by people who believe that Schumacher was better.

I think people make allowances for drivers that go over the hill, it happened for Schumacher after all.


Do they, poker? I often see people in this forum use the three years that Schumi came back from retirement to bash his legacy... if you are honest you have seen them too. Since Rockie and Siao are talking hypotheticals their discussion is valid. Personally, I believe that Senna had lived, he was going to have a very tough time with young Schumi and while many say that Senna's early passing stopped him from winning two more WDCs, I don't think it would have happened.


Quite possibly with a small minority getting beaten by Schumacher would have effected Senna's legacy. Schumacher's a good example. In most people's eyes getting beat by Alonso to the 06 championship at the end of his first career did little to detract from his overall standing. I think most people put their top 5 (greatest) as Clark, Fangio, Prost, Schumacher, Senna. I don't think Senna would've dropped out of that big 5 had he lived.

Also let's not forget that Alonso's first title came in 2005.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6287
Location: Nebraska, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
Blake wrote:

Do they, poker? I often see people in this forum use the three years that Schumi came back from retirement to bash his legacy... if you are honest you have seen them too. Since Rockie and Siao are talking hypotheticals their discussion is valid. Personally, I believe that Senna had lived, he was going to have a very tough time with young Schumi and while many say that Senna's early passing stopped him from winning two more WDCs, I don't think it would have happened.


Quite possibly with a small minority getting beaten by Schumacher would have effected Senna's legacy. Schumacher's a good example. In most people's eyes getting beat by Alonso to the 06 championship at the end of his first career did little to detract from his overall standing. I think most people put their top 5 (greatest) as Clark, Fangio, Prost, Schumacher, Senna. I don't think Senna would've dropped out of that big 5 had he lived.


I won't argue that, mikey, I too think he would still be in that "big 5", but maybe not has #1 as many are wont to do. BTW, you top five is pretty much the same as mine would be, but maybe not that exact order.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Last edited by Blake on Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

Were their teammates 4-time WDCs considered to be the best driver in the sport prior to being teamed with them? The only reason you are making the argument that you are is to try to take away from what Senna was as a driver by suggesting that it's blown out of proportion because of his death. I call BS on that as I watched his career and he was every bit as great as he's remembered. It's sad how some people feel the need to tear someone down in order to prop up others. You can speak about Vettel being a great driver without having to try to take away from other greats.

Indeed with Vettel in mind which great driver has he ever beaten in the same car?

Frankly none, and the same can be said for Schumacher. That is the knock on those guys; that they never had to overcome someone of elite caliber in the same car and with equal status. With Senna, you can certainly look to his years against Prost. With Hamilton, you can look to his time against Alonso, Button or even Rosberg. With Vettel, the only time he was up against someone who people see as top shelf, he lost. It's a small sample size so it's understandable if people hesitate to draw conclusions from it but that is the sample. 2014 is the only year. With Schumacher, the first time he had a top driver as a teammate was when he was old and probably past his prime.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Did you watch Ayrton Senna race? I doubt that you did. When he came into F1 he had multiple podiums in an absolute backmarker of a car as a rookie. It was literally the equivalent of someone in this year's Williams securing multiple podiums\ finishes. When he teamed with Prost, Prost was widely considered the best all around driver in F1. Senna out-qualified him 13-3 that year including the legendary Monaco session where he beat Prost by 1.5 seconds.

The reason I tell you that is to point out that, unlike some people want to suggest, Senna's reputation is not based on the fact that he died. It's based on the fact that he was an anomaly while he was racing. He had a bigger gap in pace to the field than any driver since. Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, none of them have had the kind of margin that Senna showed in his prime. His death does perhaps add to the mystique but it is not what made him a legend.


I actually watched Senna race and a lot before him, need not get into the age thing as nowadays the internet gives all access to info.

You see this is what I was saying no one I mean not even an AI will podium with the Williams this year, it's the sort of nonsense I was talking about people spewing about Senna, in the years he was doing that the attrition and reliability rate was high, if Senna raced in a backmarker in this era he will look no better than a Leclerc that's not even including his unforced errors. Gasly finished 4th in Bahrain he was almost a minute behind with the car in 1st position not pushing.

Are you now saying you have not watched a qualifying session where Vettel or Hamilton have beaten their respective team mates by same or close margin?

Were their teammates 4-time WDCs considered to be the best driver in the sport prior to being teamed with them? The only reason you are making the argument that you are is to try to take away from what Senna was as a driver by suggesting that it's blown out of proportion because of his death. I call BS on that as I watched his career and he was every bit as great as he's remembered. It's sad how some people feel the need to tear someone down in order to prop up others. You can speak about Vettel being a great driver without having to try to take away from other greats.

Indeed with Vettel in mind which great driver has he ever beaten in the same car?

Frankly none, and the same can be said for Schumacher. That is the knock on those guys; that they never had to overcome someone of elite caliber in the same car and with equal status. With Senna, you can certainly look to his years against Prost. With Hamilton, you can look to his time against Alonso, Button or even Rosberg. With Vettel, the only time he was up against someone who people see as top shelf, he lost. It's a small sample size so it's understandable if people hesitate to draw conclusions from it but that is the sample. 2014 is the only year. With Schumacher, the first time he had a top driver as a teammate was when he was old and probably past his prime.

Well the first time was going to be Kimi but he retired which was a shame for Schumacher because I think he would have schooled him, avoiding the best drivers of an era never seems to come up that much in debates.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6287
Location: Nebraska, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Indeed with Vettel in mind which great driver has he ever beaten in the same car?

Frankly none, and the same can be said for Schumacher. That is the knock on those guys; that they never had to overcome someone of elite caliber in the same car and with equal status. With Senna, you can certainly look to his years against Prost. With Hamilton, you can look to his time against Alonso, Button or even Rosberg. With Vettel, the only time he was up against someone who people see as top shelf, he lost. It's a small sample size so it's understandable if people hesitate to draw conclusions from it but that is the sample. 2014 is the only year. With Schumacher, the first time he had a top driver as a teammate was when he was old and probably past his prime.


I think that you are both are doing a disservice to Schumi and perhaps even Vettel. It goes back to perceptions. If Schumi had not been the driver he was, how might we perceive a Rubens Barrichello with 2-3 WDCs to his name today? Would he then be considered "a great driver" in the same car? I won't hesitate for a moment to say that I think Rubens was every bit the equal, or perhaps superior, to Button or Rosberg in his prime years. Of course he won't have the shiny record that people see.. ie WDCs, but then those other drivers did not have to compete against the likes of Michael Schumacher on the same team. I don't believe that Alonso, Vettel or Hamilton could have beat Schumi over the year during the time that Rubens was at Ferrari either, so why is a "death knell" for his repuation that Barrichello didn't? and in putting down Rubens, that allows some, such as yourselves, to say that Schumi never beat a "great driver" in the same car. Vettel's situation is, of course, tougher to make, though I think that Webber is not given enough credit over the Red Bull years.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6287
Location: Nebraska, USA
pokerman wrote:
Well the first time was going to be Kimi but he retired which was a shame for Schumacher because I think he would have schooled him, avoiding the best drivers of an era never seems to come up that much in debates.


Of course it does, you, for example, love to bring it up whenever opportunity come up.
:lol:

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: England
If Senna had lived and stayed at Williams I have absolutely no problem stating that I think he would have won both the titles Hill and Villenueve picked up. 1994 is a different scenario because his death very much directly impacted on exactly how that dark season went, but to say he would have won 2 more titles with Schumacher around had he lived is an entirely realistic statement.

Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well the first time was going to be Kimi but he retired which was a shame for Schumacher because I think he would have schooled him, avoiding the best drivers of an era never seems to come up that much in debates.


Of course it does, you, for example, love to bring it up whenever opportunity come up.
:lol:



To be fair, he's defending Schumacher with it here lol. I think a year against Schumacher at that stage in his career would really, really change the way a lot of people still see Kimi now.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 2 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 7:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26865
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Indeed with Vettel in mind which great driver has he ever beaten in the same car?

Frankly none, and the same can be said for Schumacher. That is the knock on those guys; that they never had to overcome someone of elite caliber in the same car and with equal status. With Senna, you can certainly look to his years against Prost. With Hamilton, you can look to his time against Alonso, Button or even Rosberg. With Vettel, the only time he was up against someone who people see as top shelf, he lost. It's a small sample size so it's understandable if people hesitate to draw conclusions from it but that is the sample. 2014 is the only year. With Schumacher, the first time he had a top driver as a teammate was when he was old and probably past his prime.


I think that you are both are doing a disservice to Schumi and perhaps even Vettel. It goes back to perceptions. If Schumi had not been the driver he was, how might we perceive a Rubens Barrichello with 2-3 WDCs to his name today? Would he then be considered "a great driver" in the same car? I won't hesitate for a moment to say that I think Rubens was every bit the equal, or perhaps superior, to Button or Rosberg in his prime years. Of course he won't have the shiny record that people see.. ie WDCs, but then those other drivers did not have to compete against the likes of Michael Schumacher on the same team. I don't believe that Alonso, Vettel or Hamilton could have beat Schumi over the year during the time that Rubens was at Ferrari either, so why is a "death knell" for his repuation that Barrichello didn't? and in putting down Rubens, that allows some, such as yourselves, to say that Schumi never beat a "great driver" in the same car. Vettel's situation is, of course, tougher to make, though I think that Webber is not given enough credit over the Red Bull years.

Tier 2 drivers winning world titles sometimes happens, Rubens was tier 2, he was slower than Irvine in 1995 and that's why Irvine got the Ferrari call up. He was 34 when he joined Button at BAR Honda and Button beat him 3 years out of 4 including the all important title year, Button wasn't tier 1 either.

I'm a big boxing fan, legacies are as much about fighters they have beat as titles won, unfortunately in F1 it tends to be more about titles won and that's easier to do if you avoid the best drivers in the same car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Colinjb, dsf1, Google Adsense [Bot], mikeyg123, wire2004, Zoue and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group