planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:37 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

Which records will Hamilton break?
Poll ended at Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:54 pm
World Titles 10%  10%  [ 14 ]
Race Wins 16%  16%  [ 22 ]
Fastest Laps 4%  4%  [ 6 ]
Podiums 17%  17%  [ 24 ]
Laps Led 7%  7%  [ 10 ]
KMs Led 6%  6%  [ 9 ]
Hat Tricks 4%  4%  [ 5 ]
Wins/Podiums in Consecutive Years 10%  10%  [ 14 ]
Wins at an Individual Grand Prix/Circuit 11%  11%  [ 16 ]
Consecutive Podiums 4%  4%  [ 5 ]
Consecutive Wins 4%  4%  [ 6 ]
Consecutive Poles 4%  4%  [ 5 ]
Grand Slams 4%  4%  [ 5 ]
Total votes : 141
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 731
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.

Interesting :thumbup:


I also messed up as I was going off your original post :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5556
Badgeronimous wrote:
So long as Mercedes deliver a car capable of winning 80% of races entered, and giving Lewis wins in over 50% of the races he enters, as per the last 5 seasons, he possibly will take them all.

Tbh, if he had a more compliant team mate, akin to Schumacher, he probably would be there already.

His 5yr run of really great cars is unprecedented in F1 history. The first 3 years were pretty unreal with Merc dominance.

No it's not unprecedented. Ferrari's 6 years from 1999-2004 was very similar.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6090
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:
So long as Mercedes deliver a car capable of winning 80% of races entered, and giving Lewis wins in over 50% of the races he enters, as per the last 5 seasons, he possibly will take them all.

Tbh, if he had a more compliant team mate, akin to Schumacher, he probably would be there already.

His 5yr run of really great cars is unprecedented in F1 history. The first 3 years were pretty unreal with Merc dominance.

No it's not unprecedented. Ferrari's 6 years from 1999-2004 was very similar.

I think the 3 years Badgeronimous was referring to (2014-2016) exceed anything Ferrari put up in terms of dominance. In terms of having 5 years in the best or equal-best car, however, it's not unprecedented.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 10:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Johnson wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Johnson wrote:
I think when people say 1994 had no champions it’s a shorthand way of saying all the above.

No, I guarantee from knowing people who say it that it's a revisionist attempt to remove Schumacher's WDC for perceived cheating.


Revisionist?

Its a fact, when Senna died the field had no champions in it.

Yeah that kind of came out of the blue.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 10:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6090
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Johnson wrote:
I think when people say 1994 had no champions it’s a shorthand way of saying all the above.

No, I guarantee from knowing people who say it that it's a revisionist attempt to remove Schumacher's WDC for perceived cheating.


Revisionist?

Its a fact, when Senna died the field had no champions in it.

Yeah that kind of came out of the blue.

I just realized I completely misread Johnson's post! :blush:

I thought he said 'when people say 1994 had no champion', which is a completely different thing. There are people who try to say Schumacher isn't really the 1994 champion, and that's what I thought you were saying.

Sorry!

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 10:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Johnson wrote:
I think when people say 1994 had no champions it’s a shorthand way of saying all the above.

No, I guarantee from knowing people who say it that it's a revisionist attempt to remove Schumacher's WDC for perceived cheating.


Revisionist?

Its a fact, when Senna died the field had no champions in it.

Yeah that kind of came out of the blue.

I just realized I completely misread Johnson's post! :blush:

I thought he said 'when people say 1994 had no champion', which is a completely different thing. There are people who try to say Schumacher isn't really the 1994 champion, and that's what I thought you were saying.

Sorry!

Fair enough :)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Posts: 592
Location: Far North of Scotland
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:
So long as Mercedes deliver a car capable of winning 80% of races entered, and giving Lewis wins in over 50% of the races he enters, as per the last 5 seasons, he possibly will take them all.

Tbh, if he had a more compliant team mate, akin to Schumacher, he probably would be there already.

His 5yr run of really great cars is unprecedented in F1 history. The first 3 years were pretty unreal with Merc dominance.

No it's not unprecedented. Ferrari's 6 years from 1999-2004 was very similar.

I think the 3 years Badgeronimous was referring to (2014-2016) exceed anything Ferrari put up in terms of dominance. In terms of having 5 years in the best or equal-best car, however, it's not unprecedented.


Oh yeah, Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari and Williams have went on 4-5yr stints where they may well of had the best car in my 26yrs watching the sport - so it isn't unprecedented - however no team has ever had an advantage like Merc had for 60 odd races that the 14-16 cars had. Maybe a season here and there can be comparable, but never that far ahead for that length of time. Perhaps only the '04 Ferrari is comparable to any of those 3 cars, I don't even think the '02 car is, despite the (on paper)
stats (I feel Ferrari wasn't dominant until after the Summer break, and Schumacher running away with it to the extent he did was partly due to him+ferrari being head and shoulders above, and the other contenders sharing the points with each other)

Tbf, Hamilton having a more competitive team mate does negate the car advantage to a degree.

Doing rough maths, if Hamilton had as compliant a team mate as Schumacher had during those years, he may well be sitting on 83-84 wins, likewise Schumacher may be pushing close to 100 wins had the Ferrari of his 5 championship years been comparable to Mercedes for each of the past 5yrs.


Last edited by Badgeronimous on Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:40 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1922
Schumacher won 56% of races in his dominant Ferrari stretch from 2000-2004. Hamilton is currently on 51% for 2014-2018. Vettel achieved 44% in his dominant Red Bull phase from 2010-2013.

Schumacher definitely reaped some very substantial rewards through the status he had in the team, which is something he'd been accustomed to for several years already, going back to his Benetton days. Hamilton definitely reaped some very substantial further reward over Schumacher when it comes to the sheer force of dominance of the Mercedes in its best years. Those opposing factors may be a wash, but then adding in the aspect of a competitive team-mate in Rosberg, who had equal status in the team and quite some ability to use that status, might tip the balance in favour of Schumacher for having the more fruitful circumstance, yet this must be tempered with the likelihood that Schumacher is better in the art to curry favour in a team and would have never let such a situation develop. But then, going forward, the odds look stacked in Hamilton's favour; not for win percentage, but for the sheer stretch of competitiveness most of us here are assuming Mercedes will enjoy, which will bring their stretch of having a Championship contending car to at least 7 years and perhaps beyond. It's this circumstance and opportunity (not proven yet but let's face it we all think Merc will be good at least through 2020) that gives Lewis Hamilton the platform to approach Schumacher's records. Further, if Hamilton somehow maintains this level of focus and performance and reproduces seasons like 2017 and especially 2018 in the reaching of those records, he will be rightfully compared with Schumacher as being a comparable giant. That's a big ask, because despite his opportunity it is no trivial thing to maintain this standard of performance and challenges will come from Ferrari and RBR - I am quite positive about it.

** the term curry favour doesn't really work here... more that through charisma, dominance, excellence and circumstance Schumacher was able to position himself with great force in his teams.


Last edited by Invade on Sat Oct 13, 2018 12:06 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6403
Location: Nebraska, USA
Actually, 2002 and 2004 were the only years where Schumi had a dominate car the likes of the recent Mercs. The other Ferraris were competitive or even marginally better that the competition.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 12:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6090
Location: Michigan, USA
Blake wrote:
Actually, 2002 and 2004 were the only years where Schumi had a dominate car the likes of the recent Mercs. The other Ferraris were competitive or even marginally better that the competition.

2004 saw Ferrari miss out on 3 wins, so that's about on the average Mercedes managed over 2014-16. 2002 saw only a single missed win, so statistically better than anything Merc has achieved - although I wouldn't try to say the 2002 Ferrari was more dominant than the 2014 Mercedes, that would be silly.

For the rest, I'd say the 2000 car probably had a similar advantage to Mercedes in 2017 - which is to say, not much and Schumacher made the difference. In 2001 they likely had a similar advantage but with weaker competition. 2003, the car wasn't even necessarily the best, so I'd say weaker than any of the Mercedes title winners.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
Blake wrote:
Actually, 2002 and 2004 were the only years where Schumi had a dominate car the likes of the recent Mercs. The other Ferraris were competitive or even marginally better that the competition.

There is no doubt that of the three dominant cars (2002/2004 Ferrari, 2009.5 - 2013 Red Bull and 2014-2016 Mercedes) that the Mercedes has the biggest margin over the Ferrari. In fact, in the last 40 years, I would say that only the 1992-1993 Williams had a bigger pace advantage over the rest of the field (and possibly the 1988/89 McLarens) However, that's merely based on measuring the pace gap to the field, and ultimately just having a dominant car is enough to sweep up the championships.

Schumacher and Ferrari showed that as long as you had an edge on the competition, then reliability was more important than more pace. The Red Bull in 2011 and 2013, the Mercs from 2014-2016 and the Ferrari in 2002 and 2004 were very reliable cars, they started in front, stayed in front, built a gap and crossed the finish line.

It is certainly therefore true that Hamilton has enjoyed 3 years in a dominant and reliable car, whereas Schumacher and Vettel had 2, however the fact that Hamilton only won two WDCs in those 3 years highlights another key difference between his situation and Schumacher's - he was having to fight against his team mate. We can debate about the quality of Rosberg vs Barrichello, but it's ultimately irrelevant - had Schumacher been in a straight and fair fight with Barrichello in 2002 and 2004 then his win stats would have been slightly lower - it's impossible to say by how much (I don't think it would make a dramatic difference) but it's impossible to go back and determine now given that the strategies, running order etc etc... would have all be built around Schumacher's number 1 status. It's not as simple as saying "Barrichello would have got Austria 2002, but Schumacher USA 2002"

Ferrari were right to do what they did, just as Mercedes were right to do things the way they have. Ferrari were searching for themselves again in Formula 1 after 20 years without a champion. They needed to rebuild their status within the sport. Before Schumacher joined they had turned into a joke in the paddock, the has-beens of the sport (I remember a Clarkson documentary in the mid nineties where he said the only way Ferrari could win a race was if all the cars were a Ferrari) - they needed to re-exert themselves on the sport, and they did. Ferrari and Schumacher built each other's legacies.

Mercedes were in a different situation, there was no soul searching needed. The wanted to establish Mercedes superiority, but doing that the Ferrari way would not be in their interests. They knew that repeating processional wins with one driver ordained for the victory would result in negative PR for the sport, negative PR for their brand and quick regulation changes from the FIA to cut the dominance (like happened with Ferrari, for example the 2003 points change, the 2005 tyre rule changes etc etc) - they knew their 2014 package was going to dominate, and they didn't want that to be taken from them straight away. So the only way to let that happen was to let their drivers fight.

In short. If we were to measure the competitiveness of their cars, then Hamilton's package over time has been higher than Schumacher's. However, unlike Schumacher, Hamilton had to fight his teammate when his package was dominant, meaning that it's impossible to categorically say who has performed the better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 4:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Actually, 2002 and 2004 were the only years where Schumi had a dominate car the likes of the recent Mercs. The other Ferraris were competitive or even marginally better that the competition.

There is no doubt that of the three dominant cars (2002/2004 Ferrari, 2009.5 - 2013 Red Bull and 2014-2016 Mercedes) that the Mercedes has the biggest margin over the Ferrari. In fact, in the last 40 years, I would say that only the 1992-1993 Williams had a bigger pace advantage over the rest of the field (and possibly the 1988/89 McLarens) However, that's merely based on measuring the pace gap to the field, and ultimately just having a dominant car is enough to sweep up the championships.

Schumacher and Ferrari showed that as long as you had an edge on the competition, then reliability was more important than more pace. The Red Bull in 2011 and 2013, the Mercs from 2014-2016 and the Ferrari in 2002 and 2004 were very reliable cars, they started in front, stayed in front, built a gap and crossed the finish line.

It is certainly therefore true that Hamilton has enjoyed 3 years in a dominant and reliable car, whereas Schumacher and Vettel had 2, however the fact that Hamilton only won two WDCs in those 3 years highlights another key difference between his situation and Schumacher's - he was having to fight against his team mate. We can debate about the quality of Rosberg vs Barrichello, but it's ultimately irrelevant - had Schumacher been in a straight and fair fight with Barrichello in 2002 and 2004 then his win stats would have been slightly lower - it's impossible to say by how much (I don't think it would make a dramatic difference) but it's impossible to go back and determine now given that the strategies, running order etc etc... would have all be built around Schumacher's number 1 status. It's not as simple as saying "Barrichello would have got Austria 2002, but Schumacher USA 2002"

Ferrari were right to do what they did, just as Mercedes were right to do things the way they have. Ferrari were searching for themselves again in Formula 1 after 20 years without a champion. They needed to rebuild their status within the sport. Before Schumacher joined they had turned into a joke in the paddock, the has-beens of the sport (I remember a Clarkson documentary in the mid nineties where he said the only way Ferrari could win a race was if all the cars were a Ferrari) - they needed to re-exert themselves on the sport, and they did. Ferrari and Schumacher built each other's legacies.

Mercedes were in a different situation, there was no soul searching needed. The wanted to establish Mercedes superiority, but doing that the Ferrari way would not be in their interests. They knew that repeating processional wins with one driver ordained for the victory would result in negative PR for the sport, negative PR for their brand and quick regulation changes from the FIA to cut the dominance (like happened with Ferrari, for example the 2003 points change, the 2005 tyre rule changes etc etc) - they knew their 2014 package was going to dominate, and they didn't want that to be taken from them straight away. So the only way to let that happen was to let their drivers fight.

In short. If we were to measure the competitiveness of their cars, then Hamilton's package over time has been higher than Schumacher's. However, unlike Schumacher, Hamilton had to fight his teammate when his package was dominant, meaning that it's impossible to categorically say who has performed the better.

That could arguably be a function of the fact that the Mercedes was so far ahead of the competition that there was simply no point in having team orders.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 731
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Actually, 2002 and 2004 were the only years where Schumi had a dominate car the likes of the recent Mercs. The other Ferraris were competitive or even marginally better that the competition.

There is no doubt that of the three dominant cars (2002/2004 Ferrari, 2009.5 - 2013 Red Bull and 2014-2016 Mercedes) that the Mercedes has the biggest margin over the Ferrari. In fact, in the last 40 years, I would say that only the 1992-1993 Williams had a bigger pace advantage over the rest of the field (and possibly the 1988/89 McLarens) However, that's merely based on measuring the pace gap to the field, and ultimately just having a dominant car is enough to sweep up the championships.

Schumacher and Ferrari showed that as long as you had an edge on the competition, then reliability was more important than more pace. The Red Bull in 2011 and 2013, the Mercs from 2014-2016 and the Ferrari in 2002 and 2004 were very reliable cars, they started in front, stayed in front, built a gap and crossed the finish line.

It is certainly therefore true that Hamilton has enjoyed 3 years in a dominant and reliable car, whereas Schumacher and Vettel had 2, however the fact that Hamilton only won two WDCs in those 3 years highlights another key difference between his situation and Schumacher's - he was having to fight against his team mate. We can debate about the quality of Rosberg vs Barrichello, but it's ultimately irrelevant - had Schumacher been in a straight and fair fight with Barrichello in 2002 and 2004 then his win stats would have been slightly lower - it's impossible to say by how much (I don't think it would make a dramatic difference) but it's impossible to go back and determine now given that the strategies, running order etc etc... would have all be built around Schumacher's number 1 status. It's not as simple as saying "Barrichello would have got Austria 2002, but Schumacher USA 2002"

Ferrari were right to do what they did, just as Mercedes were right to do things the way they have. Ferrari were searching for themselves again in Formula 1 after 20 years without a champion. They needed to rebuild their status within the sport. Before Schumacher joined they had turned into a joke in the paddock, the has-beens of the sport (I remember a Clarkson documentary in the mid nineties where he said the only way Ferrari could win a race was if all the cars were a Ferrari) - they needed to re-exert themselves on the sport, and they did. Ferrari and Schumacher built each other's legacies.

Mercedes were in a different situation, there was no soul searching needed. The wanted to establish Mercedes superiority, but doing that the Ferrari way would not be in their interests. They knew that repeating processional wins with one driver ordained for the victory would result in negative PR for the sport, negative PR for their brand and quick regulation changes from the FIA to cut the dominance (like happened with Ferrari, for example the 2003 points change, the 2005 tyre rule changes etc etc) - they knew their 2014 package was going to dominate, and they didn't want that to be taken from them straight away. So the only way to let that happen was to let their drivers fight.

In short. If we were to measure the competitiveness of their cars, then Hamilton's package over time has been higher than Schumacher's. However, unlike Schumacher, Hamilton had to fight his teammate when his package was dominant, meaning that it's impossible to categorically say who has performed the better.


Interesting and good post :thumbup:

I think you touched on it, but I think saying the "2014 Mercedes was more dominant because it had 0.9 over the field and the 2004 Ferrari only had 0.5". I think that is a moot point, once a car goes over about 0.4 quicker than the field it becomes irrelevant it doesn't matter if its 0.5,0.9 or 1.5 seconds a lap quicker. You are going to win every race even when both drivers have an off weekend. Obviously the 1.5 second per lap helps on the 1-2 times per season when you need to do a recovery drive though.

The advantage Schumacher had for winning more races was he had 0.3-0.4 to his nearest rival (Barrichello) where as Hamilton had anything from +0.2 to -0.3 over Rosberg. If Mercedes were to produce another dominant car and Bottas is Hamiltons team mate, it will be more like what Schumacher had with Barrichello. But then Hamilton is doing 20 race seasons and Michael just 16, so the end result has been 10-11 wins per year for each in there dominant periods.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Mercedes were in a different situation, there was no soul searching needed. The wanted to establish Mercedes superiority, but doing that the Ferrari way would not be in their interests. They knew that repeating processional wins with one driver ordained for the victory would result in negative PR for the sport, negative PR for their brand and quick regulation changes from the FIA to cut the dominance (like happened with Ferrari, for example the 2003 points change, the 2005 tyre rule changes etc etc) - they knew their 2014 package was going to dominate, and they didn't want that to be taken from them straight away. So the only way to let that happen was to let their drivers fight.

In short. If we were to measure the competitiveness of their cars, then Hamilton's package over time has been higher than Schumacher's. However, unlike Schumacher, Hamilton had to fight his teammate when his package was dominant, meaning that it's impossible to categorically say who has performed the better.

That could arguably be a function of the fact that the Mercedes was so far ahead of the competition that there was simply no point in having team orders.

Yes, that was exactly the point I was making. It's irrelevant why Mercedes didn't impose team orders, it's only relevant that they didn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Actually, 2002 and 2004 were the only years where Schumi had a dominate car the likes of the recent Mercs. The other Ferraris were competitive or even marginally better that the competition.

There is no doubt that of the three dominant cars (2002/2004 Ferrari, 2009.5 - 2013 Red Bull and 2014-2016 Mercedes) that the Mercedes has the biggest margin over the Ferrari. In fact, in the last 40 years, I would say that only the 1992-1993 Williams had a bigger pace advantage over the rest of the field (and possibly the 1988/89 McLarens) However, that's merely based on measuring the pace gap to the field, and ultimately just having a dominant car is enough to sweep up the championships.

Schumacher and Ferrari showed that as long as you had an edge on the competition, then reliability was more important than more pace. The Red Bull in 2011 and 2013, the Mercs from 2014-2016 and the Ferrari in 2002 and 2004 were very reliable cars, they started in front, stayed in front, built a gap and crossed the finish line.

It is certainly therefore true that Hamilton has enjoyed 3 years in a dominant and reliable car, whereas Schumacher and Vettel had 2, however the fact that Hamilton only won two WDCs in those 3 years highlights another key difference between his situation and Schumacher's - he was having to fight against his team mate. We can debate about the quality of Rosberg vs Barrichello, but it's ultimately irrelevant - had Schumacher been in a straight and fair fight with Barrichello in 2002 and 2004 then his win stats would have been slightly lower - it's impossible to say by how much (I don't think it would make a dramatic difference) but it's impossible to go back and determine now given that the strategies, running order etc etc... would have all be built around Schumacher's number 1 status. It's not as simple as saying "Barrichello would have got Austria 2002, but Schumacher USA 2002"

Ferrari were right to do what they did, just as Mercedes were right to do things the way they have. Ferrari were searching for themselves again in Formula 1 after 20 years without a champion. They needed to rebuild their status within the sport. Before Schumacher joined they had turned into a joke in the paddock, the has-beens of the sport (I remember a Clarkson documentary in the mid nineties where he said the only way Ferrari could win a race was if all the cars were a Ferrari) - they needed to re-exert themselves on the sport, and they did. Ferrari and Schumacher built each other's legacies.

Mercedes were in a different situation, there was no soul searching needed. The wanted to establish Mercedes superiority, but doing that the Ferrari way would not be in their interests. They knew that repeating processional wins with one driver ordained for the victory would result in negative PR for the sport, negative PR for their brand and quick regulation changes from the FIA to cut the dominance (like happened with Ferrari, for example the 2003 points change, the 2005 tyre rule changes etc etc) - they knew their 2014 package was going to dominate, and they didn't want that to be taken from them straight away. So the only way to let that happen was to let their drivers fight.

In short. If we were to measure the competitiveness of their cars, then Hamilton's package over time has been higher than Schumacher's. However, unlike Schumacher, Hamilton had to fight his teammate when his package was dominant, meaning that it's impossible to categorically say who has performed the better.

That could arguably be a function of the fact that the Mercedes was so far ahead of the competition that there was simply no point in having team orders.

Ferrari had a couple of dominant cars yet they still used team orders.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 425
If Lewis retains his interest in doing what is required to remain at the top of the F1 heap - he will end up with all the F1 records. If he doesn't his fall will be swift.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 8:14 pm
Posts: 1720
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

_________________
Pathfinder


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6090
Location: Michigan, USA
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

Or Stirling Moss to Hamilton's Fangio. Max isn't guaranteed any titles just because he's quick.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:08 am
Posts: 98
Xink wrote:
Many of these records are Wikipedia footnotes
The main one is clearly the number of WDC and race wins. - Race wins is probably more likely .

WDC is possible but I guess luck will play a part.
Blown engines and a Gravel Trap in the pits ! are both things that have cost Lewis an extra 2 WDCs and nobody can foresee or anticipate things like that.
Who could see Rosberg winning a WDC in 2016 ?

It’s quite possible Lewis could retire with 7 WDCs then people will debate from then until the end of eternity over who is better Michael or him


Nobody knows what the dominant team/s will be from 2021.If Lewis isn’t in a competitive seat with the chance of winning a WDC he will be off


Hamilton has already broken Senna's record of Poles! ...... 80 odd right now! Far more then Schumacher's record.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:08 am
Posts: 98
mmi16 wrote:
If Lewis retains his interest in doing what is required to remain at the top of the F1 heap - he will end up with all the F1 records. If he doesn't his fall will be swift.


If Lewis retains his winning form, he would want to make sure Vettel cannot catch up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Posts: 592
Location: Far North of Scotland
Noni wrote:
Xink wrote:
Many of these records are Wikipedia footnotes
The main one is clearly the number of WDC and race wins. - Race wins is probably more likely .

WDC is possible but I guess luck will play a part.
Blown engines and a Gravel Trap in the pits ! are both things that have cost Lewis an extra 2 WDCs and nobody can foresee or anticipate things like that.
Who could see Rosberg winning a WDC in 2016 ?

It’s quite possible Lewis could retire with 7 WDCs then people will debate from then until the end of eternity over who is better Michael or him


Nobody knows what the dominant team/s will be from 2021.If Lewis isn’t in a competitive seat with the chance of winning a WDC he will be off


Hamilton has already broken Senna's record of Poles! ...... 80 odd right now! Far more then Schumacher's record.


But things like poles can be a footnote, although credible record.

In times gone by the fastest car/driver didn't always get pole due to the strategy element.

During times of the refueling era, fueling light to get pole but having to pit early might not have been as optimal a strategy as fuelling to go long but qualifying slower.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:23 am
Posts: 2660
Badgeronimous wrote:
Noni wrote:
Xink wrote:
Many of these records are Wikipedia footnotes
The main one is clearly the number of WDC and race wins. - Race wins is probably more likely .

WDC is possible but I guess luck will play a part.
Blown engines and a Gravel Trap in the pits ! are both things that have cost Lewis an extra 2 WDCs and nobody can foresee or anticipate things like that.
Who could see Rosberg winning a WDC in 2016 ?

It’s quite possible Lewis could retire with 7 WDCs then people will debate from then until the end of eternity over who is better Michael or him


Nobody knows what the dominant team/s will be from 2021.If Lewis isn’t in a competitive seat with the chance of winning a WDC he will be off


Hamilton has already broken Senna's record of Poles! ...... 80 odd right now! Far more then Schumacher's record.


But things like poles can be a footnote, although credible record.

In times gone by the fastest car/driver didn't always get pole due to the strategy element.

During times of the refueling era, fueling light to get pole but having to pit early might not have been as optimal a strategy as fuelling to go long but qualifying slower.


Never considered poles to be a footnote. As long as Iv'e been following the big three have always been WDCs, wins and poles in that order. Can't think of many sports where qualification is a major event in itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
Badgeronimous wrote:
Noni wrote:
Xink wrote:
Many of these records are Wikipedia footnotes
The main one is clearly the number of WDC and race wins. - Race wins is probably more likely .

WDC is possible but I guess luck will play a part.
Blown engines and a Gravel Trap in the pits ! are both things that have cost Lewis an extra 2 WDCs and nobody can foresee or anticipate things like that.
Who could see Rosberg winning a WDC in 2016 ?

It’s quite possible Lewis could retire with 7 WDCs then people will debate from then until the end of eternity over who is better Michael or him


Nobody knows what the dominant team/s will be from 2021.If Lewis isn’t in a competitive seat with the chance of winning a WDC he will be off


Hamilton has already broken Senna's record of Poles! ...... 80 odd right now! Far more then Schumacher's record.


But things like poles can be a footnote, although credible record.

In times gone by the fastest car/driver didn't always get pole due to the strategy element.

During times of the refueling era, fueling light to get pole but having to pit early might not have been as optimal a strategy as fuelling to go long but qualifying slower.

Only 4 of Schumacher's seasons were done under refueling, vs 3 of Hamilton's, which means proportionally Hamilton did more races under the system, even if you only include Schumacher's earlier career. It's impossible to know how much of an impact refueling affected the stats, but cases like Alonso's first pole were rare, as it was usually best to go for the optimal strategy rather than Saturday glory.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Noni wrote:
mmi16 wrote:
If Lewis retains his interest in doing what is required to remain at the top of the F1 heap - he will end up with all the F1 records. If he doesn't his fall will be swift.


If Lewis retains his winning form, he would want to make sure Vettel cannot catch up.

Yeah he actually has said that.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Badgeronimous wrote:
Noni wrote:
Xink wrote:
Many of these records are Wikipedia footnotes
The main one is clearly the number of WDC and race wins. - Race wins is probably more likely .

WDC is possible but I guess luck will play a part.
Blown engines and a Gravel Trap in the pits ! are both things that have cost Lewis an extra 2 WDCs and nobody can foresee or anticipate things like that.
Who could see Rosberg winning a WDC in 2016 ?

It’s quite possible Lewis could retire with 7 WDCs then people will debate from then until the end of eternity over who is better Michael or him


Nobody knows what the dominant team/s will be from 2021.If Lewis isn’t in a competitive seat with the chance of winning a WDC he will be off


Hamilton has already broken Senna's record of Poles! ...... 80 odd right now! Far more then Schumacher's record.


But things like poles can be a footnote, although credible record.

In times gone by the fastest car/driver didn't always get pole due to the strategy element.

During times of the refueling era, fueling light to get pole but having to pit early might not have been as optimal a strategy as fuelling to go long but qualifying slower.

The refuelling era didn't last that long but I would say since the 80s qualifying started to be a mark of who was the fastest driver highlighted by the exploits of Senna and then became an important thing to achieve as witnessed by the helmet awards given to Hamilton by both the Senna and Schumacher families, not as important as titles and wins but still important, even race wins don't necessarily guarantee titles as such and without a title they also just become a statistic.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.

Yes I'd have to agree. Schumacher's car wasn't particularly competitive against the front runners until 1994, so he spent the first couple of years in cars which were good, but not great.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 731
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.


Schumacher only did 5 races in 1991 Benetton, technically in his first 3 years he had won about 9-10 races. But he got 3 wins in the first 2 and a bit seasons. Schumacher also won the 1993 Portuguese GP on merit.

Only Hamilton, Damon Hill and JV have debuted in a better car than Schumacher (first full season) in the last 40-50 years. But his Benetton wasn't a championship contender like the others in that list.

I guess perception is a bit different too now. The 1992/93 Benettons were the 2nd/3rd best car in a field of 14 teams and only top 6 cars scoring points of 28 odd cars. Just getting points required a good car then. Now with only 20 cars and points to 10 I guess it changes perception a bit with half the field getting points. A car that could regularly get points (let alone podiums) was considered good back then. Now it needs to be regular podiums to probably be considered that, i.e. this years Red Bull.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Johnson wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.


Schumacher only did 5 races in 1991 Benetton, technically in his first 3 years he had won about 9-10 races. But he got 3 wins in the first 2 and a bit seasons. Schumacher also won the 1993 Portuguese GP on merit.

Only Hamilton, Damon Hill and JV have debuted in a better car than Schumacher (first full season) in the last 40-50 years. But his Benetton wasn't a championship contender like the others in that list.

I guess perception is a bit different too now. The 1992/93 Benettons were the 2nd/3rd best car in a field of 14 teams and only top 6 cars scoring points of 28 odd cars. Just getting points required a good car then. Now with only 20 cars and points to 10 I guess it changes perception a bit with half the field getting points. A car that could regularly get points (let alone podiums) was considered good back then. Now it needs to be regular podiums to probably be considered that, i.e. this years Red Bull.

BIB: that's one win each of his first full two years, surely. Two in total.

I think it's fair to say that regular podiums would be seen as having a good car, but nowadays the podiums tend to be locked out by the very good cars and nobody else really gets a look in anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Johnson wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.


Schumacher only did 5 races in 1991 Benetton, technically in his first 3 years he had won about 9-10 races. But he got 3 wins in the first 2 and a bit seasons. Schumacher also won the 1993 Portuguese GP on merit.

Only Hamilton, Damon Hill and JV have debuted in a better car than Schumacher (first full season) in the last 40-50 years. But his Benetton wasn't a championship contender like the others in that list.

I guess perception is a bit different too now. The 1992/93 Benettons were the 2nd/3rd best car in a field of 14 teams and only top 6 cars scoring points of 28 odd cars. Just getting points required a good car then. Now with only 20 cars and points to 10 I guess it changes perception a bit with half the field getting points. A car that could regularly get points (let alone podiums) was considered good back then. Now it needs to be regular podiums to probably be considered that, i.e. this years Red Bull.


We are talking about the cars they enjoyed;

The 1991 Benetton had a lucky win (not by Schumacher, oh Nigel Nigel...)
The 1992 Benetton had a somewhat lucky win (Senna gambled on tires in rain, it didn't work and left Schumacher to win)
The 1993 Benetton had a somewhat lucky win (Prost was all over Schumacher, but decided not to attack as he was winning the WDC with 2nd place and he is not called the professor for being st*pid)

Hell, I was being even generous, if you want to talk about technically his first two full seasons (as I compared them to Hamilton) The Benetton got 2 somewhat lucky wins against 13 for the Macca. I agree it was different back then of course.

And please don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the Benetton was a bad car. But to say it was parallel to the cars Hamilton got in his first two years is a stretch...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Siao7 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.


Schumacher only did 5 races in 1991 Benetton, technically in his first 3 years he had won about 9-10 races. But he got 3 wins in the first 2 and a bit seasons. Schumacher also won the 1993 Portuguese GP on merit.

Only Hamilton, Damon Hill and JV have debuted in a better car than Schumacher (first full season) in the last 40-50 years. But his Benetton wasn't a championship contender like the others in that list.

I guess perception is a bit different too now. The 1992/93 Benettons were the 2nd/3rd best car in a field of 14 teams and only top 6 cars scoring points of 28 odd cars. Just getting points required a good car then. Now with only 20 cars and points to 10 I guess it changes perception a bit with half the field getting points. A car that could regularly get points (let alone podiums) was considered good back then. Now it needs to be regular podiums to probably be considered that, i.e. this years Red Bull.


We are talking about the cars they enjoyed;

The 1991 Benetton had a lucky win (not by Schumacher, oh Nigel Nigel...)
The 1992 Benetton had a somewhat lucky win (Senna gambled on tires in rain, it didn't work and left Schumacher to win)
The 1993 Benetton had a somewhat lucky win (Prost was all over Schumacher, but decided not to attack as he was winning the WDC with 2nd place and he is not called the professor for being st*pid)

Hell, I was being even generous, if you want to talk about technically his first two full seasons (as I compared them to Hamilton) The Benetton got 2 somewhat lucky wins against 13 for the Macca. I agree it was different back then of course.

And please don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the Benetton was a bad car. But to say it was parallel to the cars Hamilton got in his first two years is a stretch...

That should be "oh Nelson, Nelson," but otherwise true! :-P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Yeah, I was referring to Nigel's famous "gift". Not really a win on merit, one of the most stupid gifts we have ever seen!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.

I'm not counting '91 as it was a fraction of a season (and '99 should be similarly not included when comparing runs at championships), Schumacher's career proper started in '92. I would compare the 07/08 McLaren to the 94/95 Benetton. Schumacher then has 3 years where he couldn't challenge ('92 '93 '96 - vs Hamilton '09 '11 ' 13) he also has '97 and '98 in car that could compete, but was a step behind, similar to the the '10 and '12 McLarens (although the '12 was disadvantaged more by its unreliability than performance)

Do they sequentially match, obviously not. Are they exact parallels? Of course not, but that's never going to be the case. But it can be argued that both Hamilton and Schumacher had a similar range of car performances prior to their period of dominance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Siao7 wrote:
Yeah, I was referring to Nigel's famous "gift". Not really a win on merit, one of the most stupid gifts we have ever seen!!

ah yes silly me, true. Need the facepalm emoji!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
f1madman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If Hamilton clinches the title in Austin, he will be the youngest 5x WDC beating Schumacher by 360 days.

If Vettel wins a championship in 2019 or 2020 then he will take the record from Hamilton.

If Hamilton doesn't win next year Schumacher will remain the youngest 6x and 7x WDC even if Hamilton goes on to win that many titles. Vettel has to win 6 by 2021 and 7 by 2022 to become the youngest of those, although if Hamilton wins his 6th next year then Vettel cannot claim any youngest records unless he surpasses Hamilton's count first.


I realised I made an error, Schumacher will remain the youngest by 5 days if Hamilton secures it in Austin as I erroneously used 2003 as Schumacher's 5th WDC, not 2002.

This means that Hamilton cannot take any more "youngest" records unless he becomes the youngest 8x WDC.

Vettel has to become a 5x WDC next year to take it from Schumacher.


Oh wow I still see Lewis as a bit of a youngster. Hard to imagine he'll be the second oldest driver next season.

And some would say by rights he should be the oldest.

For Hamilton to hit 5 WDCs at the same age as Schumacher (Schumacher in his 11th full season of F1, Hamilton in his 12th) kind of highlights the parallels of their careers. Both started in competitive cars, has a period of wilderness before moving to a team that built itself to a period of dominance. The question is whether Max Verstappen will be Alonso to Hamilton's Schumacher, or Schumacher to Hamilton's Senna.

With Alonso leaving and Kimi's career surely into its final couple of seasons, I certainly hope that Hamilton and Vettel continue for a few years, otherwise we'll potentially see a similar period post Imola 94 where all of the old guard had left and only one natural heir established.


Nit picking, but Schumacher '91-'93 in competitive cars (similar to Hamilton)? I don't see it. '07 and '08 the Macca or Ferrari were the cars to have, the Benetton was maybe third best. Macca in Hamilton's first 2 years got 13 wins, the Benetton in Schumacher's first 3 years got 3 (lucky wins). You are being very optimistic with this comparison.

I'm not counting '91 as it was a fraction of a season (and '99 should be similarly not included when comparing runs at championships), Schumacher's career proper started in '92. I would compare the 07/08 McLaren to the 94/95 Benetton. Schumacher then has 3 years where he couldn't challenge ('92 '93 '96 - vs Hamilton '09 '11 ' 13) he also has '97 and '98 in car that could compete, but was a step behind, similar to the the '10 and '12 McLarens (although the '12 was disadvantaged more by its unreliability than performance)

Do they sequentially match, obviously not. Are they exact parallels? Of course not, but that's never going to be the case. But it can be argued that both Hamilton and Schumacher had a similar range of car performances prior to their period of dominance.


There are some similarities for sure, but they did not both start in competitive cars as you suggested, that's the thing I commented on. As I said, nit-picking, it wasn't a dig Alien!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Zoue wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Yeah, I was referring to Nigel's famous "gift". Not really a win on merit, one of the most stupid gifts we have ever seen!!

ah yes silly me, true. Need the facepalm emoji!

No worries!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7380
Location: Belgium
Siao7 wrote:
We are talking about the cars they enjoyed;

The 1992 Benetton had a somewhat lucky win (Senna gambled on tires in rain, it didn't work and left Schumacher to win, but only after both the Williams cars developed the same problem, and were unable to make it back to their 1st and 2nd places)
Just for the sake of completeness.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
We are talking about the cars they enjoyed;

The 1992 Benetton had a somewhat lucky win (Senna gambled on tires in rain, it didn't work and left Schumacher to win, but only after both the Williams cars developed the same problem, and were unable to make it back to their 1st and 2nd places)
Just for the sake of completeness.

Thank you Fiki


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 542
Location: Kansas
Michael is on 91 wins. Lewis is on 71 as of Japan in 2018.

In the years with Mercedes Lewis has won:
2014 - 11 wins.
2015 - 10 wins.
2015 - 10 wins.
2016 - 10 wins.
2017 - 9 wins.
2018 -9 wins with 2 races to go.

...even at the rate of 9 wins per season Lewis should reach and pass 91 early in 2021.

_________________
Mission WinLater


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: Black_Flag_11, F1 MERCENARY, Kev627 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