planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:23 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:01 pm
Posts: 327
Since we all like to play the what if game; in your opinion do you think that Michael Schumacher at 31 years of age would have won while driving this years Ferrari?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
Mr.Wojo wrote:
Since we all like to play the what if game; in your opinion do you think that Michael Schumacher at 31 years of age would have won while driving this years Ferrari?


Depends how dominant Merc are for the remaining races.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:13 pm
Posts: 294
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 636
Yes, add it to his 200/2004 sequel 2007 and 2008 title wins too. Peak Schumacher would easily have 0.5 on old man Raikkonen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:35 pm
Posts: 179
Tough call. Hamilton would have him covered i think. But Schumacher would have done a better job than Vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 5:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5908
Location: Michigan, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
Mr.Wojo wrote:
Since we all like to play the what if game; in your opinion do you think that Michael Schumacher at 31 years of age would have won while driving this years Ferrari?

Depends how dominant Merc are for the remaining races.

Yeah, agreed. Peak Schumacher would have been leading the title going into Russia. Whether he'd be able to win it or not depends on what happens for the rest of the year. Merc's form post-Belgium is very strong, and I no longer consider Ferrari to have the better car.

_________________
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 07, 2018 5:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2015 3:45 am
Posts: 605
Location: Michigan, USA
I'm sure that he would be still in the championship at this point, and I think there's a good chance that he'd win... but Mercedes seem to have made a big step up. Still, a good enough first half of the season would leave a chance at the end of the season. I'd say that yes, he could have won, but it would likely have been close, and maybe even unlikely depending on how the last few races go.

_________________
Top Three: 9 wins, 25 podiums | 2016: 9th [6th] | 2017: 16th [6th] | 2018: 3rd [4th]
Pick 10: 1 win, 8 podiums | 2016: 22nd | 2017: 21st | 2018: 6th
Group Pick'em: 2 wins, 11 podiums | 2016: 14th | 2017: 10th | 2018: 10th


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 5:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
I think Schumacher is obviously better than Vettel, although in recently reviewing the entire 1998 season... that version of Schumacher wouldn't win.

Vettel isn't having his best season. We could just as easily ask would Vettel have won if he produced form the equivalent of his best seasons. What is the difference between Vettel and Schumacher if they are both in top season form? I'd say very little, but that Schumacher would have slightly better pace and have manufactured a more dominant relationship within the team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2033
peak Schumacher >>> peak Vettel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5454
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
peak Schumacher >>> peak Vettel

Yeah, if that's what this thread is getting at then I agree. Vettel is not as great as Michael was in his prime. The question of Prime Michael vs. Prime Lewis is more intriguing. Of course it's impossible to answer that question. This Ferrari team is VERY different from the team Michael was on. The current competitive landscape and the cars are also quite different.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2585
Location: England
I think even prime Michael would have had a hard time the way this season is ending. It's entirely possible given the current trajectory of the car performance that Hamilton is going to clean up till the end of the season. With that said, I think against a prime Schumacher, he would have needed to clean up to pip him at the post for the title.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
Flash2k11 wrote:
I think even prime Michael would have had a hard time the way this season is ending. It's entirely possible given the current trajectory of the car performance that Hamilton is going to clean up till the end of the season. With that said, I think against a prime Schumacher, he would have needed to clean up to pip him at the post for the title.


I think Schumacher may have built just a big enough points gap when Hamilton was a touch lack lustre and the beginning of the season and when Ferrari had the quicker car in the middle to perhaps make Merc concentrate on next years car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2585
Location: England
mikeyg123 wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
I think even prime Michael would have had a hard time the way this season is ending. It's entirely possible given the current trajectory of the car performance that Hamilton is going to clean up till the end of the season. With that said, I think against a prime Schumacher, he would have needed to clean up to pip him at the post for the title.


I think Schumacher may have built just a big enough points gap when Hamilton was a touch lack lustre and the beginning of the season and when Ferrari had the quicker car in the middle to perhaps make Merc concentrate on next years car.


Entirely plausible.

The one big unknown is how Schumacher would have dealt with the current pitwall woes. Schumacher also had his own issues with being under pressure, especially when it came down to the real endgame in a serious title fight.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6381
Location: Nebraska, USA
Simple answer:
Schumi before 1st retirement was better than Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and any other current driver. In my opinion.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3141
Anyone doubting that Hamilton is now in the same league as Senna and Schumacher after his performance this season will never be convinced. A prime Hamilton versus a prime Schumacher is obviously something everyone would be interested to see the outcome of.

I think that Hamilton is faster and more naturally talented than Schumacher, but Schumacher has more self confidence, strikes more fear in his opponents and has less off weekends.

The question certainly has parallels to the Hamilton vs Hamilton thread I started, the difference is what does Michael bring that Hamilton doesn't and what does he lose?

I think that Schumacher/Ferrari stands a better chance of beating Hamilton/Merc than the Hamilton/Ferrari package does and this is down to two reasons. Schumacher at his prime would not have missed a beat in the Ferrari, so every potential victory would have been converted, but also - Schumacher would have driven the team far more than Vettel as he is a more uncompromising character than either Vettel or Hamilton. However, would he have beaten Hamilton/Merc?

I think it would have gone to Abu Dhabi with Schumacher ahead, but with the Merc coming good. Hamilton would have been more frustrated fighting Schumacher so he would not have got the momentum he did against Vettel, and Schumacher would not have had his advantage nerfed. I daresay that Verstappen would leave Schumacher more room, too.

Who would have won? I honestly can't decide. It would be the closest Hamilton would have been taken though. We never got to properly see Senna vs Schumacher and Schumacher retired before properly going head to head with the current generation. As Formula One heads to its next changing of the guard let's hope that we get to see a few seasons of Max versus Lewis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:45 am
Posts: 705
Location: Australia
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Anyone doubting that Hamilton is now in the same league as Senna and Schumacher after his performance this season will never be convinced. A prime Hamilton versus a prime Schumacher is obviously something everyone would be interested to see the outcome of.

I think that Hamilton is faster and more naturally talented than Schumacher, but Schumacher has more self confidence, strikes more fear in his opponents and has less off weekends.

The question certainly has parallels to the Hamilton vs Hamilton thread I started, the difference is what does Michael bring that Hamilton doesn't and what does he lose?

I think that Schumacher/Ferrari stands a better chance of beating Hamilton/Merc than the Hamilton/Ferrari package does and this is down to two reasons. Schumacher at his prime would not have missed a beat in the Ferrari, so every potential victory would have been converted, but also - Schumacher would have driven the team far more than Vettel as he is a more uncompromising character than either Vettel or Hamilton. However, would he have beaten Hamilton/Merc?

I think it would have gone to Abu Dhabi with Schumacher ahead, but with the Merc coming good. Hamilton would have been more frustrated fighting Schumacher so he would not have got the momentum he did against Vettel, and Schumacher would not have had his advantage nerfed. I daresay that Verstappen would leave Schumacher more room, too.

Who would have won? I honestly can't decide. It would be the closest Hamilton would have been taken though. We never got to properly see Senna vs Schumacher and Schumacher retired before properly going head to head with the current generation. As Formula One heads to its next changing of the guard let's hope that we get to see a few seasons of Max versus Lewis.


Great post :thumbup:

_________________
#Keep Fighting Michael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5454
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Anyone doubting that Hamilton is now in the same league as Senna and Schumacher after his performance this season will never be convinced. A prime Hamilton versus a prime Schumacher is obviously something everyone would be interested to see the outcome of.

I think that Hamilton is faster and more naturally talented than Schumacher, but Schumacher has more self confidence, strikes more fear in his opponents and has less off weekends.

The question certainly has parallels to the Hamilton vs Hamilton thread I started, the difference is what does Michael bring that Hamilton doesn't and what does he lose?

I think that Schumacher/Ferrari stands a better chance of beating Hamilton/Merc than the Hamilton/Ferrari package does and this is down to two reasons. Schumacher at his prime would not have missed a beat in the Ferrari, so every potential victory would have been converted, but also - Schumacher would have driven the team far more than Vettel as he is a more uncompromising character than either Vettel or Hamilton. However, would he have beaten Hamilton/Merc?

I think it would have gone to Abu Dhabi with Schumacher ahead, but with the Merc coming good. Hamilton would have been more frustrated fighting Schumacher so he would not have got the momentum he did against Vettel, and Schumacher would not have had his advantage nerfed. I daresay that Verstappen would leave Schumacher more room, too.

Who would have won? I honestly can't decide. It would be the closest Hamilton would have been taken though. We never got to properly see Senna vs Schumacher and Schumacher retired before properly going head to head with the current generation. As Formula One heads to its next changing of the guard let's hope that we get to see a few seasons of Max versus Lewis.

I think the bolded part is a bit extreme. Michael wasn't perfect but he was a lot more sure-handed than Vettel is at the moment. I think it's likely that Michael would have built a fairly healthy lead by the end of the Italian GP. Mercedes have out-developed Ferrari though and Michael would have had to hang on down the stretch.

One element that would come into play is how well they handle pressure. Even at his peak, this was a relative area of weakness for Michael. We've seen what happened in 94' and 97' but even in 03' Michael nearly lost it at the end and that was when he was 34 years old and already a 5 time WDC. I think Hamilton in his prime has been better under pressure than any other elite driver I can think of. He has dominated the later races of the season. That might make the difference.

For the record, I remember feeling really happy for Michael when he delivered in Japan in 00' under immense pressure. To win the title on the track like that was vindicating for Michael.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 1:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3141
sandman1347 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Anyone doubting that Hamilton is now in the same league as Senna and Schumacher after his performance this season will never be convinced. A prime Hamilton versus a prime Schumacher is obviously something everyone would be interested to see the outcome of.

I think that Hamilton is faster and more naturally talented than Schumacher, but Schumacher has more self confidence, strikes more fear in his opponents and has less off weekends.

The question certainly has parallels to the Hamilton vs Hamilton thread I started, the difference is what does Michael bring that Hamilton doesn't and what does he lose?

I think that Schumacher/Ferrari stands a better chance of beating Hamilton/Merc than the Hamilton/Ferrari package does and this is down to two reasons. Schumacher at his prime would not have missed a beat in the Ferrari, so every potential victory would have been converted, but also - Schumacher would have driven the team far more than Vettel as he is a more uncompromising character than either Vettel or Hamilton. However, would he have beaten Hamilton/Merc?

I think it would have gone to Abu Dhabi with Schumacher ahead, but with the Merc coming good. Hamilton would have been more frustrated fighting Schumacher so he would not have got the momentum he did against Vettel, and Schumacher would not have had his advantage nerfed. I daresay that Verstappen would leave Schumacher more room, too.

Who would have won? I honestly can't decide. It would be the closest Hamilton would have been taken though. We never got to properly see Senna vs Schumacher and Schumacher retired before properly going head to head with the current generation. As Formula One heads to its next changing of the guard let's hope that we get to see a few seasons of Max versus Lewis.

I think the bolded part is a bit extreme. Michael wasn't perfect but he was a lot more sure-handed than Vettel is at the moment. I think it's likely that Michael would have built a fairly healthy lead by the end of the Italian GP. Mercedes have out-developed Ferrari though and Michael would have had to hang on down the stretch.

One element that would come into play is how well they handle pressure. Even at his peak, this was a relative area of weakness for Michael. We've seen what happened in 94' and 97' but even in 03' Michael nearly lost it at the end and that was when he was 34 years old and already a 5 time WDC. I think Hamilton in his prime has been better under pressure than any other elite driver I can think of. He has dominated the later races of the season. That might make the difference.

For the record, I remember feeling really happy for Michael when he delivered in Japan in 00' under immense pressure. To win the title on the track like that was vindicating for Michael.

By every potential victory I don't mean he would have won every race, he would have got all the victories Vettel should have but didn't (eg, Monza, Germany) - Schumacher was best when he was on a roll and the Ferrari in the middle season was capable of that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 1:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:01 am
Posts: 35
What's probably being forgotten, is that MSC wouldn't settle for this "is he or isn't he my #2" thing that Vettel is contending with at the moment. MSC would have had the other car moved over straight away in Germany, and he wouldn't have been giving it a tow in Italy.

It's a great question though. The Schumacher/Ferrari team would have put a LOT more pressure on Lewis/Mercedes than what Vettel currently is. I think some of that simply comes down to the belief Lewis has, that he's simply better than Seb. Would Lewis have had the same belief, that he's simply better than peak Schumacher? Hard to imagine. Plenty to ponder!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 2:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:37 pm
Posts: 681
Alonso would, if 2010 and 2012 are anything to go by.

Schumacher, most probably.

But that assessment is only until today's race.

If Mercedes keep improving ahead of Ferrari for all the races left, the small advantage gained at the beginning of the season might not be enough.

But yes, those two at least would do a much better job than what Vettel is achieving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5454
-ZeroGravityToilet- wrote:
Alonso would, if 2010 and 2012 are anything to go by.

Schumacher, most probably.

But that assessment is only until today's race.

If Mercedes keep improving ahead of Ferrari for all the races left, the small advantage gained at the beginning of the season might not be enough.

But yes, those two at least would do a much better job than what Vettel is achieving.

The Alonso of 2010 made quite a few mistakes himself. 2012 Alonso, I'd have to imagine would be doing a LOT better than Vettel is this year (and that year he was the same age that Vettel is now).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 5:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 191
Hamilton/Mercedes is an extremely strong package this year, so I'm not sure Schumacher would have won. But he would have taken the decision to the last race. Now the championship more or less has been a done deal for a while, and that wouldn't have happened for Schumacher, who wouldn't have squandered all the points that has put Vettel out of contention.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 5:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:31 am
Posts: 2072
Anyone could have one in the Merc, so yes in that car. He may have made fewer mistakes in 5he a Ferrari, and been more challenging, but could not have won based on its season ending performance. In any other car no.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 7:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Questions like this are always difficult because it basically boils down to whether you feel that driver X would have made the same mistakes that Vettel has. Take Germany, for example. Most pundits and drivers say that Vettel made a very small error but unfortunately the location and conditions gave it big consequences. The odds of another driver making the same mistake are small, but there again the odds of Vettel making the same mistake were he to do it all again are equally small. And if we look at yesterday then I'm pretty confident that Schumacher wouldn't have been averse to trying to muscle past Verstappen in the same way that Vettel did. He wasn't exactly known for being timid.

People remember the bad but before the summer many were saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton and were praising him for his performances this year. Since then his season has gone from bad to worse but before then he was fairly universally praised.

So would Schumacher have enjoyed the same bad run as Vettel since the summer break? Well, ultimately I think peak Schumacher was better than either Vettel or Hamilton. I think Hamilton may have found it harder to pass him in Russia, for example, so that race may have had a different outcome And I think Schumacher had the talent to pull rabbits out of hats so yes I think he'd be doing better now in either the Ferrari or the Mercedes than both of the incumbents. I don't think he'd have had some of Hamilton's lackluster qualifying or races in the beginning of the season, for example, and I think he'd have had a better qualifying record vs Kimi (or Bottas, for that matter). I think he'd have won the title whichever car he was in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Normally I would say yes without a doubt. However I do not know 100% how Schumacher would have coped with today's cars. He did race in the "new era", but the cars today are different to the 2012 ones. It is a different set up too, without the car development that he was used to in his first career. Having said that, Schumacher has raced through a wide change of the F1 scenery in his first career, from manual to automatic gears, to sleek or grooved tyres, you name it, and always rose to the top. Which gives support to the theory that this would not be a big problem for him, but I wouldn't be 100% sure.

The one thing that Schumacher had over all of his peers is that he was relentless. Very rarely had he an off weekend. In his peers eyes he looked indestructible, he struck fear. Lewis has the same effect up to a point, the only difference is that Lewis has possibly more off weekends than Schumacher.

In any case, I believe that Schumacher would have capitalised in the earlier form of the Ferrari and would have been ahead at this point. He was one of the drivers that could still win even if the car wasn't the fastest, so given how close the Ferrari and Merc seem to be this year, he would surely make a difference. He would surely have less mistakes than Vettel.

It would also make it interesting to see him in the same team as Kimi, given the '06 saga!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:23 am
Posts: 2631
bourbon19 wrote:
Anyone could have one in the Merc, so yes in that car. He may have made fewer mistakes in 5he a Ferrari, and been more challenging, but could not have won based on its season ending performance. In any other car no.



Anyone? So take Hamilton out of the Mercedes and put Bottas in it, not only would Vettel lose to Bottas, but so would MS?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 6:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
I just think there's easily enough variables in F1 that not only could Schumacher have won or lost, but so could have a number of other drivers including Vettel. Which year of form do you take for the driver? When and where will the luck strike and who will it favour?

This is a one of Hamilton's best years vs an iffy Vettel year. And what do you suppose would happen if Hamilton had an iffy year and Vettel put in one of his best years?

If you put Schumacher in the Ferrari or the Mercedes and assume he's in good form, then up to this point in the season against another great driver in one of their great years, he could indeed be ahead or behind. As stated earlier, I'd hardly feel confident in putting 1998 Schumacher up against Hamilton/Merc right now.

But it's just fanciful bar talk, isn't it. Schumacher might be far less effective these days and Hamilton in Schumi's days for much the same reason. One loves to test and the other is averse to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 636
One thing people forget about Schumacher is that he made generally one big unforced error per season (outside of the years he was cruising to the title) even when he was quite experienced.

1994. Hit the wall and DNF'd his car before he took Hill out
1995. San Marino, spun out.
1996. Monaco into the wall
1997. He had 3 race ending collisions
1998. Lost his wing twice at Monaco. Rear ended DC at Spa (arguably not his fault)
1999. Went into the wall of champions
2000. No individual error but went out at turn 1 twice in collisions.
2001.
2002.
2003. Spun out of Brazil. Lost his wing at Malaysia and Japan.
2004. Monaco tunnel incident. Spun out in China/Monza.
2005. Collided/Spun to 4 DNFs
2006. Spun out in Australia. Lost his wing in Hungary

2010-2012 isn't the same Schumacher so no need to bring that in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27914
Blake wrote:
Simple answer:
Schumi before 1st retirement was better than Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and any other current driver. In my opinion.

He wasn't better than Alonso in 2006.

_________________
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 08, 2018 11:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27914
Zoue wrote:
Questions like this are always difficult because it basically boils down to whether you feel that driver X would have made the same mistakes that Vettel has. Take Germany, for example. Most pundits and drivers say that Vettel made a very small error but unfortunately the location and conditions gave it big consequences. The odds of another driver making the same mistake are small, but there again the odds of Vettel making the same mistake were he to do it all again are equally small. And if we look at yesterday then I'm pretty confident that Schumacher wouldn't have been averse to trying to muscle past Verstappen in the same way that Vettel did. He wasn't exactly known for being timid.

People remember the bad but before the summer many were saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton and were praising him for his performances this year. Since then his season has gone from bad to worse but before then he was fairly universally praised.

So would Schumacher have enjoyed the same bad run as Vettel since the summer break? Well, ultimately I think peak Schumacher was better than either Vettel or Hamilton. I think Hamilton may have found it harder to pass him in Russia, for example, so that race may have had a different outcome And I think Schumacher had the talent to pull rabbits out of hats so yes I think he'd be doing better now in either the Ferrari or the Mercedes than both of the incumbents. I don't think he'd have had some of Hamilton's lackluster qualifying or races in the beginning of the season, for example, and I think he'd have had a better qualifying record vs Kimi (or Bottas, for that matter). I think he'd have won the title whichever car he was in.

Who was saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton before the summer break?

The narrative would be more like Vettel had the better car up until the summer break and would have been leading the WDC if not for his own mistakes, the lock up in Baku, hitting Bottas' car in France, crashing from the lead in Germany and the poor wet qualifying in Hungary.

_________________
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)


Last edited by pokerman on Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27914
Invade wrote:
I just think there's easily enough variables in F1 that not only could Schumacher have won or lost, but so could have a number of other drivers including Vettel. Which year of form do you take for the driver? When and where will the luck strike and who will it favour?

This is a one of Hamilton's best years vs an iffy Vettel year. And what do you suppose would happen if Hamilton had an iffy year and Vettel put in one of his best years?

If you put Schumacher in the Ferrari or the Mercedes and assume he's in good form, then up to this point in the season against another great driver in one of their great years, he could indeed be ahead or behind. As stated earlier, I'd hardly feel confident in putting 1998 Schumacher up against Hamilton/Merc right now.

But it's just fanciful bar talk, isn't it. Schumacher might be far less effective these days and Hamilton in Schumi's days for much the same reason. One loves to test and the other is averse to it.

Is it an iffy Vettel year or is it his level given that you could call 2016-18 has all being iffy years?

_________________
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: Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6381
Location: Nebraska, USA
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Simple answer:
Schumi before 1st retirement was better than Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and any other current driver. In my opinion.

He wasn't better than Alonso in 2006.


Like Lewis wasn't better than Rosberg in 2016?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3412
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Questions like this are always difficult because it basically boils down to whether you feel that driver X would have made the same mistakes that Vettel has. Take Germany, for example. Most pundits and drivers say that Vettel made a very small error but unfortunately the location and conditions gave it big consequences. The odds of another driver making the same mistake are small, but there again the odds of Vettel making the same mistake were he to do it all again are equally small. And if we look at yesterday then I'm pretty confident that Schumacher wouldn't have been averse to trying to muscle past Verstappen in the same way that Vettel did. He wasn't exactly known for being timid.

People remember the bad but before the summer many were saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton and were praising him for his performances this year. Since then his season has gone from bad to worse but before then he was fairly universally praised.

So would Schumacher have enjoyed the same bad run as Vettel since the summer break? Well, ultimately I think peak Schumacher was better than either Vettel or Hamilton. I think Hamilton may have found it harder to pass him in Russia, for example, so that race may have had a different outcome And I think Schumacher had the talent to pull rabbits out of hats so yes I think he'd be doing better now in either the Ferrari or the Mercedes than both of the incumbents. I don't think he'd have had some of Hamilton's lackluster qualifying or races in the beginning of the season, for example, and I think he'd have had a better qualifying record vs Kimi (or Bottas, for that matter). I think he'd have won the title whichever car he was in.

Who was saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton before the summer break?

The narrative would be more like Vettel had the better car up until the summer break and would have been leading the WDC if not for his own mistakes, the lock up in Baku, hitting Bottas' car in France, crashing from the lead in Germany and the poor wet qualifying in Hungary.


Maybe for the first 1/4 of the season, Vettel did seem to be driving better than Hamilton, but Lewis's performances after that changed that narrative by the summer break.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 5:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:08 am
Posts: 25
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Simple answer:
Schumi before 1st retirement was better than Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and any other current driver. In my opinion.

He wasn't better than Alonso in 2006.


Like Lewis wasn't better than Rosberg in 2016?


To respond in kind!

2006

Ahead in 2-car finishes: 8 Alonso - 6 Schumacher

Podiums: 14 Alonso - 12 Schumacher

Pole Positions: 6 Alonso - 4 Schumacher

Wins: 7 Alonso - 7 Schumacher

Retirements: 2 Alsonso - 2 Schumacher

Interested persons can easily supply themselves with the rest

2016

Ahead in 2-car finishes: 10 Hamilton - 9 Rosberg

Podiums: 17 Hamilton - 16 Rosberg

Pole Positions: 12 Hamilton - 7 Rosberg

Wins: 10 Hamilton - 9 Rosberg

Retirements: 2 Hamilton - 1 Rosberg

And so it goes.

As Alienturnedhuman already said, upon recent evidence (such as the last two seasons), judgements as to who, of Schumacher or Hamilton is better, have been put into such doubt that anyone unwilling to entertain the possibility either way is probably a categorical holdout.

I'll just say this to those who unequivocally answer Schumacher. Simply looking at pole percentages across their career, it's quite clear to me that the fastest drivers over a lap in F1 history have been Clark, Senna, and then Hamilton, in that order. At the time of the 2006 Grand Prix (when he got his last pole position), Schumacher was standing at 27.98%. Clark is at 45.21%, Senna is at 40.12%, and Hamilton is at 35.6%. I wanted to be as charitable as I could so I even left off the couple or so Grand Prix entries Michael still had before his first retirement. As you can see by the numbers, there is just a considerable percentage disparity that can't really be accounted for by any amount of extenuating circumstances (refueling era, his early years at Jordan and Benetton (just for the hell of it I discounted the 41 or so entries that preceded the 1994 Monaco Grand Prix, the time of Michael's first Pole, and got 33.66% as his adjusted number!), etc.).

Conservatively I think we can say at the least, that Michael WAS NOT faster over a lap than Lewis. So that is one thing out of the window. Then there is the fact that one of Michael's trump cards during his career, his total superiority in the wet over everyone else on the grid, would be completely negated against Lewis. Then there is the fact that, if anything, he was an even worse starter than Lewis. Any race pace difference between them, in my estimation, is pretty much negligible. It seems that anyone trying to cite an advantage Michael had in this match-up has to center on amorphous areas like intimidation factor and mental strength (and the last for a guy that, after all, stalled his car on the grid after nabbing pole at the title round 1998 Japanese Grand Prix when he still had a chance of winning, something for which Hamilton would be endlessly excoriated had he done so in a similar situation).

In the end though, whichever way you decide, I at least would appreciate some discrete breakdowns, for my own edification more than anything else, and not just these one line dismissals. It just seems like kids with their hands over their ears, and their eyes closed yelling "NANANANANANANA!" to whatever unwelcome thing someone might be telling them. Relate to us please, in what ways was Michael better?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Questions like this are always difficult because it basically boils down to whether you feel that driver X would have made the same mistakes that Vettel has. Take Germany, for example. Most pundits and drivers say that Vettel made a very small error but unfortunately the location and conditions gave it big consequences. The odds of another driver making the same mistake are small, but there again the odds of Vettel making the same mistake were he to do it all again are equally small. And if we look at yesterday then I'm pretty confident that Schumacher wouldn't have been averse to trying to muscle past Verstappen in the same way that Vettel did. He wasn't exactly known for being timid.

People remember the bad but before the summer many were saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton and were praising him for his performances this year. Since then his season has gone from bad to worse but before then he was fairly universally praised.

So would Schumacher have enjoyed the same bad run as Vettel since the summer break? Well, ultimately I think peak Schumacher was better than either Vettel or Hamilton. I think Hamilton may have found it harder to pass him in Russia, for example, so that race may have had a different outcome And I think Schumacher had the talent to pull rabbits out of hats so yes I think he'd be doing better now in either the Ferrari or the Mercedes than both of the incumbents. I don't think he'd have had some of Hamilton's lackluster qualifying or races in the beginning of the season, for example, and I think he'd have had a better qualifying record vs Kimi (or Bottas, for that matter). I think he'd have won the title whichever car he was in.

Who was saying that Vettel was driving better than Hamilton before the summer break?

The narrative would be more like Vettel had the better car up until the summer break and would have been leading the WDC if not for his own mistakes, the lock up in Baku, hitting Bottas' car in France, crashing from the lead in Germany and the poor wet qualifying in Hungary.

I think a lot of people considered Vettel to have had the better half until Germany at least. A number of people thought Hamilton was a bit subdued at the beginning of the season, to be fair.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
breathemyexhaust wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Simple answer:
Schumi before 1st retirement was better than Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and any other current driver. In my opinion.

He wasn't better than Alonso in 2006.


Like Lewis wasn't better than Rosberg in 2016?


To respond in kind!

2006

Ahead in 2-car finishes: 8 Alonso - 6 Schumacher

Podiums: 14 Alonso - 12 Schumacher

Pole Positions: 6 Alonso - 4 Schumacher

Wins: 7 Alonso - 7 Schumacher

Retirements: 2 Alsonso - 2 Schumacher

Interested persons can easily supply themselves with the rest

2016

Ahead in 2-car finishes: 10 Hamilton - 9 Rosberg

Podiums: 17 Hamilton - 16 Rosberg

Pole Positions: 12 Hamilton - 7 Rosberg

Wins: 10 Hamilton - 9 Rosberg

Retirements: 2 Hamilton - 1 Rosberg

And so it goes.

As Alienturnedhuman already said, upon recent evidence (such as the last two seasons), judgements as to who, of Schumacher or Hamilton is better, have been put into such doubt that anyone unwilling to entertain the possibility either way is probably a categorical holdout.

I'll just say this to those who unequivocally answer Schumacher. Simply looking at pole percentages across their career, it's quite clear to me that the fastest drivers over a lap in F1 history have been Clark, Senna, and then Hamilton, in that order. At the time of the 2006 Grand Prix (when he got his last pole position), Schumacher was standing at 27.98%. Clark is at 45.21%, Senna is at 40.12%, and Hamilton is at 35.6%. I wanted to be as charitable as I could so I even left off the couple or so Grand Prix entries Michael still had before his first retirement. As you can see by the numbers, there is just a considerable percentage disparity that can't really be accounted for by any amount of extenuating circumstances (refueling era, his early years at Jordan and Benetton (just for the hell of it I discounted the 41 or so entries that preceded the 1994 Monaco Grand Prix, the time of Michael's first Pole, and got 33.66% as his adjusted number!), etc.).

Conservatively I think we can say at the least, that Michael WAS NOT faster over a lap than Lewis. So that is one thing out of the window. Then there is the fact that one of Michael's trump cards during his career, his total superiority in the wet over everyone else on the grid, would be completely negated against Lewis. Then there is the fact that, if anything, he was an even worse starter than Lewis. Any race pace difference between them, in my estimation, is pretty much negligible. It seems that anyone trying to cite an advantage Michael had in this match-up has to center on amorphous areas like intimidation factor and mental strength (and the last for a guy that, after all, stalled his car on the grid after nabbing pole at the title round 1998 Japanese Grand Prix when he still had a chance of winning, something for which Hamilton would be endlessly excoriated had he done so in a similar situation).

In the end though, whichever way you decide, I at least would appreciate some discrete breakdowns, for my own edification more than anything else, and not just these one line dismissals. It just seems like kids with their hands over their ears, and their eyes closed yelling "NANANANANANANA!" to whatever unwelcome thing someone might be telling them. Relate to us please, in what ways was Michael better?

Why would Hamilton be excoriated? It was an overheating problem that caused the hydraulics to stall the car. Hakkinen mentioned that, his mechanics brought ice to his car, the Ferrari crew where nowhere to be seen and the red car overheated. Ferrari themselves was what let that car down, Schumacher didn't stall under pressure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Johnson wrote:
One thing people forget about Schumacher is that he made generally one big unforced error per season (outside of the years he was cruising to the title) even when he was quite experienced.

1994. Hit the wall and DNF'd his car before he took Hill out
1995. San Marino, spun out.
1996. Monaco into the wall
1997. He had 3 race ending collisions
1998. Lost his wing twice at Monaco. Rear ended DC at Spa (arguably not his fault)
1999. Went into the wall of champions
2000. No individual error but went out at turn 1 twice in collisions.
2001.
2002.
2003. Spun out of Brazil. Lost his wing at Malaysia and Japan.
2004. Monaco tunnel incident. Spun out in China/Monza.
2005. Collided/Spun to 4 DNFs
2006. Spun out in Australia. Lost his wing in Hungary

2010-2012 isn't the same Schumacher so no need to bring that in.


What kind of argument is this? Which driver doesn't spin or lose the car? Senna did, Fangio did, Clark did and paid with his life. They ALL make mistakes.

Also, you should have left out a few of them. The DC incident was DC's fault. In 2000 you mention yourself that there was no individual error, so why include that?

Finally, shouldn't you do the same list for Lewis if you wanted to compare them?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
breathemyexhaust wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
Simple answer:
Schumi before 1st retirement was better than Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and any other current driver. In my opinion.

He wasn't better than Alonso in 2006.


Like Lewis wasn't better than Rosberg in 2016?


To respond in kind!

2006

Ahead in 2-car finishes: 8 Alonso - 6 Schumacher

Podiums: 14 Alonso - 12 Schumacher

Pole Positions: 6 Alonso - 4 Schumacher

Wins: 7 Alonso - 7 Schumacher

Retirements: 2 Alsonso - 2 Schumacher

Interested persons can easily supply themselves with the rest

2016

Ahead in 2-car finishes: 10 Hamilton - 9 Rosberg

Podiums: 17 Hamilton - 16 Rosberg

Pole Positions: 12 Hamilton - 7 Rosberg

Wins: 10 Hamilton - 9 Rosberg

Retirements: 2 Hamilton - 1 Rosberg

And so it goes.

As Alienturnedhuman already said, upon recent evidence (such as the last two seasons), judgements as to who, of Schumacher or Hamilton is better, have been put into such doubt that anyone unwilling to entertain the possibility either way is probably a categorical holdout.

I'll just say this to those who unequivocally answer Schumacher. Simply looking at pole percentages across their career, it's quite clear to me that the fastest drivers over a lap in F1 history have been Clark, Senna, and then Hamilton, in that order. At the time of the 2006 Grand Prix (when he got his last pole position), Schumacher was standing at 27.98%. Clark is at 45.21%, Senna is at 40.12%, and Hamilton is at 35.6%. I wanted to be as charitable as I could so I even left off the couple or so Grand Prix entries Michael still had before his first retirement. As you can see by the numbers, there is just a considerable percentage disparity that can't really be accounted for by any amount of extenuating circumstances (refueling era, his early years at Jordan and Benetton (just for the hell of it I discounted the 41 or so entries that preceded the 1994 Monaco Grand Prix, the time of Michael's first Pole, and got 33.66% as his adjusted number!), etc.).

Conservatively I think we can say at the least, that Michael WAS NOT faster over a lap than Lewis. So that is one thing out of the window. Then there is the fact that one of Michael's trump cards during his career, his total superiority in the wet over everyone else on the grid, would be completely negated against Lewis. Then there is the fact that, if anything, he was an even worse starter than Lewis. Any race pace difference between them, in my estimation, is pretty much negligible. It seems that anyone trying to cite an advantage Michael had in this match-up has to center on amorphous areas like intimidation factor and mental strength (and the last for a guy that, after all, stalled his car on the grid after nabbing pole at the title round 1998 Japanese Grand Prix when he still had a chance of winning, something for which Hamilton would be endlessly excoriated had he done so in a similar situation).

In the end though, whichever way you decide, I at least would appreciate some discrete breakdowns, for my own edification more than anything else, and not just these one line dismissals. It just seems like kids with their hands over their ears, and their eyes closed yelling "NANANANANANANA!" to whatever unwelcome thing someone might be telling them. Relate to us please, in what ways was Michael better?

BIB: no, that's not out of the window at all. It's clearly your personal opinion but not something that may be taken as read.

As to the rest, you simply cannot point to percentages as proof of qualifying superiority when so many other factors come into play, not least the quality of your own car vs that of the opposition. Hamilton wouldn't have had a single pole if he'd been sitting in a McLaren these last few years, but that is just circumstance and in no way has any bearing on his abilities over one lap. It's seriously flawed to try to use that to determine a definitive ranking.

To a certain extent much of what separates the perception of the drivers at this level is subjective. Having witnessed both drivers in their prime, I can say that while there is often considerable debate over which driver today is the best out there, there was no such debate that I recall during Schumacher's golden years. However that in itself isn't proof that Schumacher was better. And it's difficult to match his performance in the 1996 Spanish Grand Prix with anything anyone has done today IMO, or his equally impressive performance in Spain in 1994 when he managed to come 2nd despite being stuck in 5th gear for much of the race, but again that's largely subjective.

You'll always have two camps, like with the endless debate over who was better between Senna and Schumacher. And comparing across generations is difficult at best.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 636
Siao7 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
One thing people forget about Schumacher is that he made generally one big unforced error per season (outside of the years he was cruising to the title) even when he was quite experienced.

1994. Hit the wall and DNF'd his car before he took Hill out
1995. San Marino, spun out.
1996. Monaco into the wall
1997. He had 3 race ending collisions
1998. Lost his wing twice at Monaco. Rear ended DC at Spa (arguably not his fault)
1999. Went into the wall of champions
2000. No individual error but went out at turn 1 twice in collisions.
2001.
2002.
2003. Spun out of Brazil. Lost his wing at Malaysia and Japan.
2004. Monaco tunnel incident. Spun out in China/Monza.
2005. Collided/Spun to 4 DNFs
2006. Spun out in Australia. Lost his wing in Hungary

2010-2012 isn't the same Schumacher so no need to bring that in.


What kind of argument is this? Which driver doesn't spin or lose the car? Senna did, Fangio did, Clark did and paid with his life. They ALL make mistakes.

Also, you should have left out a few of them. The DC incident was DC's fault. In 2000 you mention yourself that there was no individual error, so why include that?

Finally, shouldn't you do the same list for Lewis if you wanted to compare them?


Hamilton 2018? That was the point, hard to beat somebody who makes no errors. Alonso made no errros in 2006 too.

2000, I couldn’t remember if Schumacher was at fault for either of the two turn 1 crashes to DNF. What I meant was, no individual unforced error (I.e. on his own on track, like the majority of them).

It could be in part down to track design, but the last time Hamilton retired with an individual error was China 2007?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 947
Johnson wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
One thing people forget about Schumacher is that he made generally one big unforced error per season (outside of the years he was cruising to the title) even when he was quite experienced.

1994. Hit the wall and DNF'd his car before he took Hill out
1995. San Marino, spun out.
1996. Monaco into the wall
1997. He had 3 race ending collisions
1998. Lost his wing twice at Monaco. Rear ended DC at Spa (arguably not his fault)
1999. Went into the wall of champions
2000. No individual error but went out at turn 1 twice in collisions.
2001.
2002.
2003. Spun out of Brazil. Lost his wing at Malaysia and Japan.
2004. Monaco tunnel incident. Spun out in China/Monza.
2005. Collided/Spun to 4 DNFs
2006. Spun out in Australia. Lost his wing in Hungary

2010-2012 isn't the same Schumacher so no need to bring that in.


What kind of argument is this? Which driver doesn't spin or lose the car? Senna did, Fangio did, Clark did and paid with his life. They ALL make mistakes.

Also, you should have left out a few of them. The DC incident was DC's fault. In 2000 you mention yourself that there was no individual error, so why include that?

Finally, shouldn't you do the same list for Lewis if you wanted to compare them?


Hamilton 2018? That was the point, hard to beat somebody who makes no errors. Alonso made no errros in 2006 too.

2000, I couldn’t remember if Schumacher was at fault for either of the two turn 1 crashes to DNF. What I meant was, no individual unforced error (I.e. on his own on track, like the majority of them).

It could be in part down to track design, but the last time Hamilton retired with an individual error was China 2007?


: ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83FrJdDAhyU


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: froze, Lotus49, owenmahamilton, TheDamus 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