planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:16 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prema wrote:
pokerman wrote:
You do know that I'm making comparison with Schumacher at Ferrari and pray tell who else Mercedes could have signed that would have suited their remit, why did it become so important to sign Hamilton if basically they never needed him in the first place, I did explain the scenario that was playing out?


Oh yes, I do know that you are making that comparison between Schumacher in Ferrari and Hamilton in Mercedes - in terms of bringing the team from nothing to everything. But all I am saying is that, besides this bare fact that both teams prior to these respective drivers' arrival were not winning anything, just like so in the case of Vettel and RBR, you got NOTHING that to impress us with as what exactly did Hamilton contribute so significantly (if in any way) to the development of the Merc supreme PU and the entire machinery at large, all that while he was busy racing in that pre-hybrid era car. And so much so that without him arriving, the Mercedes' PU dominance perhaps would not had happened. I mean, rally. Look, then I'd say, Rosberg did it. He made it happen. Why not? He was there too.

And yes, all you got here is your "scenario" that Mercedes signed Hamilton. The Magical Hamilton, I presume.

And if you really still wonder why a top team like Mercedes would sign Hamilton... just as same as why McLaren would sign Alonso, and Ferrari sign Alonso and then Vettel, and so on. They are the best and fastest F1 drivers that are available to them at the given time. Does that make a sense to you?

Yes as much sense as Ferrari signing Schumacher.

Surely even you are aware that you are comparing apples to oranges?

What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

Schumacher tested constantly. I seem to recall he slept at the track in the early days. I doubt he was just aimlessly driving around in circles and some good must have come of it.

Drivers today don't get the opportunity to do that, so their input is much more limited.


Last edited by Mod Titanium on Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alonso didn't leave a better situation to go to a poorer one, likewise Vettel when he left STR, I'm talking about a driver leaving a title capable car and going into a worse car like when Schumacher left Benetton and when Hamilton left McLaren, that's were the comparisons are very similar.

You could say the likes of Alonso, Hamilton and Vettel all lucked into title winning cars, they were all junior drivers for the teams come whether the car was going to be good or bad.

Hamilton did not leave a title capable car to go to Mercedes - he left McLaren precisley because he had decided they weren't title capable. Very different from what Schumi did - he didn't quit Benetton in disgust and just take the best offer available, which is what Hamilton basically did. Similar idea for Seb going to Ferrari: he didn't leave a title capable car, he decided that the RBR no longer was one.

Hamilton had the fastest car in F1 when he left McLaren, Button the supposed more cerebral driver thought Hamilton was an idiot and the 2013 title was going to be open season for him, I say more praise to Hamilton to see the writing on the wall for McLaren.

Schumacher left Benetton for the massive retainer offered by Ferrari, also there were suggestions that he was keen to get away from the cheating rumours that surrounded Benetton.

I think you're projecting here. Hamilton didn't see the writing on the wall at McLaren. At least, there's no evidence that's the case and I don't think even he has claimed that. He left because he was disillusioned with the number of errors and mishaps that were occurring (and ironically left to go to a team with an arguably worse track record in that regard), coupled with alleged unhappiness about his contract terms (who gets to keep trophies etc) and Bernie orchestrated a move for him to Mercedes. By all accounts he needed persuasion to do that, as he wasn't initially convinced about Mercedes at all.

What eventually happened at McLaren is irrelevant to Hamilton's motivation. I'll bet the farm that no-one could possibly have foreseen just how low they'd sink. Likewise, Hamilton didn't have some magic crystal ball that would have told him just how dominant the Mercedes would become, in the same way that Alonso didn't have a faulty one when he re-joined McLaren with their Honda partnership. They were sold exactly the same dream and the only difference is that the engineers came good on the Mercedes side. Let's not get carried away and imbue anyone with special powers of perception here. And those dreams were also lined with massive retainers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prema wrote:

Oh yes, I do know that you are making that comparison between Schumacher in Ferrari and Hamilton in Mercedes - in terms of bringing the team from nothing to everything. But all I am saying is that, besides this bare fact that both teams prior to these respective drivers' arrival were not winning anything, just like so in the case of Vettel and RBR, you got NOTHING that to impress us with as what exactly did Hamilton contribute so significantly (if in any way) to the development of the Merc supreme PU and the entire machinery at large, all that while he was busy racing in that pre-hybrid era car. And so much so that without him arriving, the Mercedes' PU dominance perhaps would not had happened. I mean, rally. Look, then I'd say, Rosberg did it. He made it happen. Why not? He was there too.

And yes, all you got here is your "scenario" that Mercedes signed Hamilton. The Magical Hamilton, I presume.

And if you really still wonder why a top team like Mercedes would sign Hamilton... just as same as why McLaren would sign Alonso, and Ferrari sign Alonso and then Vettel, and so on. They are the best and fastest F1 drivers that are available to them at the given time. Does that make a sense to you?

Yes as much sense as Ferrari signing Schumacher.

Surely even you are aware that you are comparing apples to oranges?

What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

Schumacher tested constantly. I seem to recall he slept at the track in the early days. I doubt he was just aimlessly driving around in circles and some good must have come of it.

Drivers today don't get the opportunity to do that, so their input is much more limited.


Indeed, he was sleeping in Enzo's old office. He literally stayed on the track and regularly did dawn to dusk sessions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Schumacher did not develop any F1 car and he also did not built a team around him. He drove faster and better than most and more successful than anyone - and that should be enough, really.

Todt and di Montezemolo bought out the successful team from Benetton and threw much more money on them than Benetton ever could. And that was a hugely successful strategy!

Edit: The times of Jack Brabham were long over by then.


He didn't hire the engineers around him obviously. Todt is the unsung hero in the Ferrari revival. He did built a "team" though and set the standards to a different level at that time. He would know everyone by first name in the factory, send flowers to personnel that had birthdays, went to their kids parties. A big deal too for a private, shy introvert like he was. You'll find that he did a lot more behind the scenes for his team than other drivers and he won their loyalty. Made them rally around him. It really does make a difference when you work with someone like that, you may have experienced this at your own workplace. Do not underestimate what that does to a team.

As for the team itself, I remember a story when he first visited the factory that a car was leaking and the engineer just wiped the floor, that was the state of the team back then. Schumacher made the guy take the car apart and find the problem, fix it. I can't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt if you wish. But it is reported time and again what work he did behind the scenes in that team.

Cr*p, you made me sound like a boyband fanboy now!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prema wrote:
Oh yes, I do know that you are making that comparison between Schumacher in Ferrari and Hamilton in Mercedes - in terms of bringing the team from nothing to everything. But all I am saying is that, besides this bare fact that both teams prior to these respective drivers' arrival were not winning anything, just like so in the case of Vettel and RBR, you got NOTHING that to impress us with as what exactly did Hamilton contribute so significantly (if in any way) to the development of the Merc supreme PU and the entire machinery at large, all that while he was busy racing in that pre-hybrid era car. And so much so that without him arriving, the Mercedes' PU dominance perhaps would not had happened. I mean, rally. Look, then I'd say, Rosberg did it. He made it happen. Why not? He was there too.

And yes, all you got here is your "scenario" that Mercedes signed Hamilton. The Magical Hamilton, I presume.

And if you really still wonder why a top team like Mercedes would sign Hamilton... just as same as why McLaren would sign Alonso, and Ferrari sign Alonso and then Vettel, and so on. They are the best and fastest F1 drivers that are available to them at the given time. Does that make a sense to you?

Yes as much sense as Ferrari signing Schumacher.

Surely even you are aware that you are comparing apples to oranges?

What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

Schumacher tested constantly. I seem to recall he slept at the track in the early days. I doubt he was just aimlessly driving around in circles and some good must have come of it.

Drivers today don't get the opportunity to do that, so their input is much more limited.

I know one thing he used to do was attach 3 or 4 stopwatches to his steering wheel to simulate sector times which at the time was not available to the drivers in normal driving, anyway he would try different things in the corners and then look at the stopwatch and see if that was an improvement, so he was looking to improve his own driving, how he was able assimilate all that information whilst driving beggars belief.

As to his testing ability over to what Eddie Irvine apparently said, 5th post down

https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057079031

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.


pokerman. You win. Schumi didn't do anything to make Ferrari better. All he did was drive, oh and maybe something of relatively little significance... such as motivate. He had basically no effect on the team's growth whatsoever... certainly did not do anything more, if as much, than Lewis has done, after all he brought Paddy Lowe too. In fact, he may have done even less, as it has already been pointed out that it took several more years for Big Budget Ferrari to win than it did the guys at Hamilton/Mercedes, so I guess you can make the case that Schumi just have been a liability instead. Darn Schumi... Thank gawd that we had Luca and Todt!

;)

A drivers either contributes to a team or he doesn't?

In your definition Schumacher gets a 10 and Hamilton gets a big fact zero and there seemingly is no middle ground.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alonso didn't leave a better situation to go to a poorer one, likewise Vettel when he left STR, I'm talking about a driver leaving a title capable car and going into a worse car like when Schumacher left Benetton and when Hamilton left McLaren, that's were the comparisons are very similar.

You could say the likes of Alonso, Hamilton and Vettel all lucked into title winning cars, they were all junior drivers for the teams come whether the car was going to be good or bad.

Hamilton did not leave a title capable car to go to Mercedes - he left McLaren precisley because he had decided they weren't title capable. Very different from what Schumi did - he didn't quit Benetton in disgust and just take the best offer available, which is what Hamilton basically did. Similar idea for Seb going to Ferrari: he didn't leave a title capable car, he decided that the RBR no longer was one.

Hamilton had the fastest car in F1 when he left McLaren, Button the supposed more cerebral driver thought Hamilton was an idiot and the 2013 title was going to be open season for him, I say more praise to Hamilton to see the writing on the wall for McLaren.

Schumacher left Benetton for the massive retainer offered by Ferrari, also there were suggestions that he was keen to get away from the cheating rumours that surrounded Benetton.

I think you're projecting here. Hamilton didn't see the writing on the wall at McLaren. At least, there's no evidence that's the case and I don't think even he has claimed that. He left because he was disillusioned with the number of errors and mishaps that were occurring (and ironically left to go to a team with an arguably worse track record in that regard), coupled with alleged unhappiness about his contract terms (who gets to keep trophies etc) and Bernie orchestrated a move for him to Mercedes. By all accounts he needed persuasion to do that, as he wasn't initially convinced about Mercedes at all.

What eventually happened at McLaren is irrelevant to Hamilton's motivation. I'll bet the farm that no-one could possibly have foreseen just how low they'd sink. Likewise, Hamilton didn't have some magic crystal ball that would have told him just how dominant the Mercedes would become, in the same way that Alonso didn't have a faulty one when he re-joined McLaren with their Honda partnership. They were sold exactly the same dream and the only difference is that the engineers came good on the Mercedes side. Let's not get carried away and imbue anyone with special powers of perception here. And those dreams were also lined with massive retainers.

The writing on the wall was his belief that McLaren were incapable of winning titles, most of the rest that you say I wouldn't really look to disagree with apart from the size of retainer which was no bigger than McLaren offered him.

At least you are highlighting the level of risk that Hamilton took more than this kind of view that everything gets gifted to him, it seems like unless success takes several years to find then it's gifted?

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Siao7 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Schumacher did not develop any F1 car and he also did not built a team around him. He drove faster and better than most and more successful than anyone - and that should be enough, really.

Todt and di Montezemolo bought out the successful team from Benetton and threw much more money on them than Benetton ever could. And that was a hugely successful strategy!

Edit: The times of Jack Brabham were long over by then.


He didn't hire the engineers around him obviously. Todt is the unsung hero in the Ferrari revival. He did built a "team" though and set the standards to a different level at that time. He would know everyone by first name in the factory, send flowers to personnel that had birthdays, went to their kids parties. A big deal too for a private, shy introvert like he was. You'll find that he did a lot more behind the scenes for his team than other drivers and he won their loyalty. Made them rally around him. It really does make a difference when you work with someone like that, you may have experienced this at your own workplace. Do not underestimate what that does to a team.

As for the team itself, I remember a story when he first visited the factory that a car was leaking and the engineer just wiped the floor, that was the state of the team back then. Schumacher made the guy take the car apart and find the problem, fix it. I can't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt if you wish. But it is reported time and again what work he did behind the scenes in that team.

Cr*p, you made me sound like a boyband fanboy now!

Spotting a leak and realising there is a problem is quite standard stuff, it says less of the mechanic rather than more of Schumacher.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alonso didn't leave a better situation to go to a poorer one, likewise Vettel when he left STR, I'm talking about a driver leaving a title capable car and going into a worse car like when Schumacher left Benetton and when Hamilton left McLaren, that's were the comparisons are very similar.

You could say the likes of Alonso, Hamilton and Vettel all lucked into title winning cars, they were all junior drivers for the teams come whether the car was going to be good or bad.

Hamilton did not leave a title capable car to go to Mercedes - he left McLaren precisley because he had decided they weren't title capable. Very different from what Schumi did - he didn't quit Benetton in disgust and just take the best offer available, which is what Hamilton basically did. Similar idea for Seb going to Ferrari: he didn't leave a title capable car, he decided that the RBR no longer was one.

Hamilton had the fastest car in F1 when he left McLaren, Button the supposed more cerebral driver thought Hamilton was an idiot and the 2013 title was going to be open season for him, I say more praise to Hamilton to see the writing on the wall for McLaren.

Schumacher left Benetton for the massive retainer offered by Ferrari, also there were suggestions that he was keen to get away from the cheating rumours that surrounded Benetton.

I think you're projecting here. Hamilton didn't see the writing on the wall at McLaren. At least, there's no evidence that's the case and I don't think even he has claimed that. He left because he was disillusioned with the number of errors and mishaps that were occurring (and ironically left to go to a team with an arguably worse track record in that regard), coupled with alleged unhappiness about his contract terms (who gets to keep trophies etc) and Bernie orchestrated a move for him to Mercedes. By all accounts he needed persuasion to do that, as he wasn't initially convinced about Mercedes at all.

What eventually happened at McLaren is irrelevant to Hamilton's motivation. I'll bet the farm that no-one could possibly have foreseen just how low they'd sink. Likewise, Hamilton didn't have some magic crystal ball that would have told him just how dominant the Mercedes would become, in the same way that Alonso didn't have a faulty one when he re-joined McLaren with their Honda partnership. They were sold exactly the same dream and the only difference is that the engineers came good on the Mercedes side. Let's not get carried away and imbue anyone with special powers of perception here. And those dreams were also lined with massive retainers.

The writing on the wall was his belief that McLaren were incapable of winning titles, most of the rest that you say I wouldn't really look to disagree with apart from the size of retainer which was no bigger than McLaren offered him.

At least you are highlighting the level of risk that Hamilton took more than this kind of view that everything gets gifted to him, it seems like unless success takes several years to find then it's gifted?

I agree he took a risk when he left McLaren for Mercedes. It was by no means a sure thing and it's easy to write it off as so with hindsight.

But that's not the same as saying he foresaw anything. He didn't seek out Mercedes, nor did he have any special powers of perception that told him Mercedes would be the team to beat going forward, or that McLaren would take a dive. I really don't see any difference with Alonso's decision to go with McLaren-Honda; it's just luck that makes one driver look incredibly wise and the other poor at making decisions, but neither contributed to the end result beyond driving what the engineers produced for them.

And that's not a reflection of either driver, either. Like I've already pointed out, drivers are much more limited now with how they can contribute to a car's development than they were in Schumacher's (first) time. Everything is done with computers and simulations now, not seat of the pants driving


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

I think he undoubtedly does, but I don't think he attracted significantly more than 7-times WDC Schumacher did when he was at Mercedes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Yes as much sense as Ferrari signing Schumacher.

Surely even you are aware that you are comparing apples to oranges?

What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

Schumacher tested constantly. I seem to recall he slept at the track in the early days. I doubt he was just aimlessly driving around in circles and some good must have come of it.

Drivers today don't get the opportunity to do that, so their input is much more limited.

I know one thing he used to do was attach 3 or 4 stopwatches to his steering wheel to simulate sector times which at the time was not available to the drivers in normal driving, anyway he would try different things in the corners and then look at the stopwatch and see if that was an improvement, so he was looking to improve his own driving, how he was able assimilate all that information whilst driving beggars belief.

As to his testing ability over to what Eddie Irvine apparently said, 5th post down

https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057079031

he also apparently said Schumacher had slow reflexes, according to another post there, which I'm finding pretty hard to reconcile with the man who got pole at Monaco when already in his 40s... Think more than a large dose of salt is needed for that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2033
Siao7 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Schumacher did not develop any F1 car and he also did not built a team around him. He drove faster and better than most and more successful than anyone - and that should be enough, really.

Todt and di Montezemolo bought out the successful team from Benetton and threw much more money on them than Benetton ever could. And that was a hugely successful strategy!

Edit: The times of Jack Brabham were long over by then.


He didn't hire the engineers around him obviously. Todt is the unsung hero in the Ferrari revival. He did built a "team" though and set the standards to a different level at that time. He would know everyone by first name in the factory, send flowers to personnel that had birthdays, went to their kids parties. A big deal too for a private, shy introvert like he was. You'll find that he did a lot more behind the scenes for his team than other drivers and he won their loyalty. Made them rally around him. It really does make a difference when you work with someone like that, you may have experienced this at your own workplace. Do not underestimate what that does to a team.

As for the team itself, I remember a story when he first visited the factory that a car was leaking and the engineer just wiped the floor, that was the state of the team back then. Schumacher made the guy take the car apart and find the problem, fix it. I can't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt if you wish. But it is reported time and again what work he did behind the scenes in that team.

Cr*p, you made me sound like a boyband fanboy now!


The comparison you draw in your final sentence is actually quite accurate. One of the big innovations off the track was that stories like the ones you report were actively publicized and promoted. There are similar stories about Piquet or Villeneuve (Gilles) and others regarding socializing within the team - just with less marketing efforts.

Schumacher shy and introvert? Well, I met him several times when he did F3 - and these were certainly not fitting attributes.

One of the absolute greatest drivers ever and a huge tragedy post-career. I am still feeling shocked and in disbelief when I think of his state today. He deserves so much credit, he really does not need the myths.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Hamilton did not leave a title capable car to go to Mercedes - he left McLaren precisley because he had decided they weren't title capable. Very different from what Schumi did - he didn't quit Benetton in disgust and just take the best offer available, which is what Hamilton basically did. Similar idea for Seb going to Ferrari: he didn't leave a title capable car, he decided that the RBR no longer was one.

Hamilton had the fastest car in F1 when he left McLaren, Button the supposed more cerebral driver thought Hamilton was an idiot and the 2013 title was going to be open season for him, I say more praise to Hamilton to see the writing on the wall for McLaren.

Schumacher left Benetton for the massive retainer offered by Ferrari, also there were suggestions that he was keen to get away from the cheating rumours that surrounded Benetton.

I think you're projecting here. Hamilton didn't see the writing on the wall at McLaren. At least, there's no evidence that's the case and I don't think even he has claimed that. He left because he was disillusioned with the number of errors and mishaps that were occurring (and ironically left to go to a team with an arguably worse track record in that regard), coupled with alleged unhappiness about his contract terms (who gets to keep trophies etc) and Bernie orchestrated a move for him to Mercedes. By all accounts he needed persuasion to do that, as he wasn't initially convinced about Mercedes at all.

What eventually happened at McLaren is irrelevant to Hamilton's motivation. I'll bet the farm that no-one could possibly have foreseen just how low they'd sink. Likewise, Hamilton didn't have some magic crystal ball that would have told him just how dominant the Mercedes would become, in the same way that Alonso didn't have a faulty one when he re-joined McLaren with their Honda partnership. They were sold exactly the same dream and the only difference is that the engineers came good on the Mercedes side. Let's not get carried away and imbue anyone with special powers of perception here. And those dreams were also lined with massive retainers.

The writing on the wall was his belief that McLaren were incapable of winning titles, most of the rest that you say I wouldn't really look to disagree with apart from the size of retainer which was no bigger than McLaren offered him.

At least you are highlighting the level of risk that Hamilton took more than this kind of view that everything gets gifted to him, it seems like unless success takes several years to find then it's gifted?

I agree he took a risk when he left McLaren for Mercedes. It was by no means a sure thing and it's easy to write it off as so with hindsight.

But that's not the same as saying he foresaw anything. He didn't seek out Mercedes, nor did he have any special powers of perception that told him Mercedes would be the team to beat going forward, or that McLaren would take a dive. I really don't see any difference with Alonso's decision to go with McLaren-Honda; it's just luck that makes one driver look incredibly wise and the other poor at making decisions, but neither contributed to the end result beyond driving what the engineers produced for them.

And that's not a reflection of either driver, either. Like I've already pointed out, drivers are much more limited now with how they can contribute to a car's development than they were in Schumacher's (first) time. Everything is done with computers and simulations now, not seat of the pants driving

He went with what he felt was right in leaving McLaren, he saw how they operated and he left, he called that right and I don't think him being right can be just called pure luck.

As far as Mercedes was concerned the fact is at the time it was seen that Mercedes needed him more than he needed Mercedes, believe what you want to believe but it's no coincidence that Mercedes started pumping more money into the race team after Hamilton was signed and that's why I believe it was so important for the likes of Brawn and Lauda to convince Hamilton to join the team, 2012 was a very bad year for Mercedes, the race team was under financed and floundering.

As far as Schumacher contributing to the design of the car because he happened to pound around Fiorana is just really applying some kind of double standard without any actual proof, the designers design the car, saying that Schumacher contributed more to the development of a car moreso than Hamilton at Mercedes is totally unproven, what contributed more were the massive budgets of both teams.

_________________
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 Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

I think he undoubtedly does, but I don't think he attracted significantly more than 7-times WDC Schumacher did when he was at Mercedes.

This is not really an issue of who attracted more or not this is an issue that Schumacher contributed to the success of Ferrari whilst Hamilton contributed nothing to the success of Mercedes, this is actually what is being implied.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Surely even you are aware that you are comparing apples to oranges?

What Schumacher did with Ferrari will likely never be repeated. Not because no-one will ever be as good as him, but because with every year that passes drivers contribute less and less to the development of the cars, while computers dominate. Schumacher's achievements were from a different time

Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

Schumacher tested constantly. I seem to recall he slept at the track in the early days. I doubt he was just aimlessly driving around in circles and some good must have come of it.

Drivers today don't get the opportunity to do that, so their input is much more limited.

I know one thing he used to do was attach 3 or 4 stopwatches to his steering wheel to simulate sector times which at the time was not available to the drivers in normal driving, anyway he would try different things in the corners and then look at the stopwatch and see if that was an improvement, so he was looking to improve his own driving, how he was able assimilate all that information whilst driving beggars belief.

As to his testing ability over to what Eddie Irvine apparently said, 5th post down

https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057079031

he also apparently said Schumacher had slow reflexes, according to another post there, which I'm finding pretty hard to reconcile with the man who got pole at Monaco when already in his 40s... Think more than a large dose of salt is needed for that

Michael Schumacher having slow reflexes is old news said many years ago, try and throw one thing out then you can throw something else out.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5929
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Michael Schumacher having slow reflexes is old news said many years ago, try and throw one thing out then you can throw something else out.

I don't think it was so much slow as just not special, but yes, I've seen that a few times. Reflexes don't have much to do with driving - you shouldn't be reacting to the car anyway.

_________________
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 Apr 13, 2018 12:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 413
If the subject is drivers making a difference to a team's performance the one which comes to mind is Senna at Toleman and Lotus

IIRC he pulled results out of those cars due to his talent


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 413
Mod edit


Last edited by Mod Titanium on Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
split topic from another thread


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:04 am
Posts: 297
jiminwatford wrote:
If the subject is drivers making a difference to a team's performance the one which comes to mind is Senna at Toleman and Lotus

IIRC he pulled results out of those cars due to his talent



this topic is a discussion that arose from another thread where many ideas were tossed around so it was split to this one.

_________________
- Mod Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6382
Location: Nebraska, USA
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.


pokerman. You win. Schumi didn't do anything to make Ferrari better. All he did was drive, oh and maybe something of relatively little significance... such as motivate. He had basically no effect on the team's growth whatsoever... certainly did not do anything more, if as much, than Lewis has done, after all he brought Paddy Lowe too. In fact, he may have done even less, as it has already been pointed out that it took several more years for Big Budget Ferrari to win than it did the guys at Hamilton/Mercedes, so I guess you can make the case that Schumi just have been a liability instead. Darn Schumi... Thank gawd that we had Luca and Todt!

;)

A drivers either contributes to a team or he doesn't?

In your definition Schumacher gets a 10 and Hamilton gets a big fact zero and there seemingly is no middle ground.


I didn't say that, but then don't let that get in your way of creating Alternate Facts. I have already said, more than once, that Schumi was but one factor of several (Luca & Todt primarily) in the Ferrari resurgence, and you go and get yourself all out of joint with your all too familiar the "oh, but what about what Lewis did" bit. I did not say that Lewis did not contribute anything to the Merc success despite what you claim, but I honestly do believe that his contribution cannot be compared to the role that Schumi played at Ferrari. So, in this case, I along with a great many others, both in the sport and from the sidelines believe that, while Lewis' driving certainly helped Merc in their successes, his role in the team development does not match what the role that Schumi played with Ferrari in the mid-90s thru the early 2000s. And that is ALL that I said. I don't believe that I have to apologize for believing that, and despite what you might think, saying it does not insult Lewis Hamilton. I did not give Schumi a 10, though I could see that argument being made given what was expected of him, nor did I give Lewis a ZERO despite how you might feel.

BTW, in response to Ferrari having a massive budget and spending to develop their car.... would you like to borrow a mirror so you can see that Mercedes is not exactly without financial resources!

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 4:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman. You win. Schumi didn't do anything to make Ferrari better. All he did was drive, oh and maybe something of relatively little significance... such as motivate. He had basically no effect on the team's growth whatsoever... certainly did not do anything more, if as much, than Lewis has done, after all he brought Paddy Lowe too. In fact, he may have done even less, as it has already been pointed out that it took several more years for Big Budget Ferrari to win than it did the guys at Hamilton/Mercedes, so I guess you can make the case that Schumi just have been a liability instead. Darn Schumi... Thank gawd that we had Luca and Todt!

;)

A drivers either contributes to a team or he doesn't?

In your definition Schumacher gets a 10 and Hamilton gets a big fact zero and there seemingly is no middle ground.


Why are we talking "Hamilton, Hamilton, Hamilton..." here? Why not "Vettel, Vettel, Vettel, Vettel"? :?
Well, I guess, because it is a well known fact that Vettel got his rocket ship from Newey, while Hamilton made one for himself. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

I think he undoubtedly does, but I don't think he attracted significantly more than 7-times WDC Schumacher did when he was at Mercedes.

This is not really an issue of who attracted more or not this is an issue that Schumacher contributed to the success of Ferrari whilst Hamilton contributed nothing to the success of Mercedes, this is actually what is being implied.

I don't think a single person has stated Hamilton has not contributed to the Mercedes success? I think you are being needlessly defensive on this topic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

Schumacher tested constantly. I seem to recall he slept at the track in the early days. I doubt he was just aimlessly driving around in circles and some good must have come of it.

Drivers today don't get the opportunity to do that, so their input is much more limited.

I know one thing he used to do was attach 3 or 4 stopwatches to his steering wheel to simulate sector times which at the time was not available to the drivers in normal driving, anyway he would try different things in the corners and then look at the stopwatch and see if that was an improvement, so he was looking to improve his own driving, how he was able assimilate all that information whilst driving beggars belief.

As to his testing ability over to what Eddie Irvine apparently said, 5th post down

https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057079031

he also apparently said Schumacher had slow reflexes, according to another post there, which I'm finding pretty hard to reconcile with the man who got pole at Monaco when already in his 40s... Think more than a large dose of salt is needed for that

Michael Schumacher having slow reflexes is old news said many years ago, try and throw one thing out then you can throw something else out.

I don't think you can have slow reflexes and be a success at Monaco. No idea what you mean by the last sentence


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Hamilton had the fastest car in F1 when he left McLaren, Button the supposed more cerebral driver thought Hamilton was an idiot and the 2013 title was going to be open season for him, I say more praise to Hamilton to see the writing on the wall for McLaren.

Schumacher left Benetton for the massive retainer offered by Ferrari, also there were suggestions that he was keen to get away from the cheating rumours that surrounded Benetton.

I think you're projecting here. Hamilton didn't see the writing on the wall at McLaren. At least, there's no evidence that's the case and I don't think even he has claimed that. He left because he was disillusioned with the number of errors and mishaps that were occurring (and ironically left to go to a team with an arguably worse track record in that regard), coupled with alleged unhappiness about his contract terms (who gets to keep trophies etc) and Bernie orchestrated a move for him to Mercedes. By all accounts he needed persuasion to do that, as he wasn't initially convinced about Mercedes at all.

What eventually happened at McLaren is irrelevant to Hamilton's motivation. I'll bet the farm that no-one could possibly have foreseen just how low they'd sink. Likewise, Hamilton didn't have some magic crystal ball that would have told him just how dominant the Mercedes would become, in the same way that Alonso didn't have a faulty one when he re-joined McLaren with their Honda partnership. They were sold exactly the same dream and the only difference is that the engineers came good on the Mercedes side. Let's not get carried away and imbue anyone with special powers of perception here. And those dreams were also lined with massive retainers.

The writing on the wall was his belief that McLaren were incapable of winning titles, most of the rest that you say I wouldn't really look to disagree with apart from the size of retainer which was no bigger than McLaren offered him.

At least you are highlighting the level of risk that Hamilton took more than this kind of view that everything gets gifted to him, it seems like unless success takes several years to find then it's gifted?

I agree he took a risk when he left McLaren for Mercedes. It was by no means a sure thing and it's easy to write it off as so with hindsight.

But that's not the same as saying he foresaw anything. He didn't seek out Mercedes, nor did he have any special powers of perception that told him Mercedes would be the team to beat going forward, or that McLaren would take a dive. I really don't see any difference with Alonso's decision to go with McLaren-Honda; it's just luck that makes one driver look incredibly wise and the other poor at making decisions, but neither contributed to the end result beyond driving what the engineers produced for them.

And that's not a reflection of either driver, either. Like I've already pointed out, drivers are much more limited now with how they can contribute to a car's development than they were in Schumacher's (first) time. Everything is done with computers and simulations now, not seat of the pants driving

He went with what he felt was right in leaving McLaren, he saw how they operated and he left, he called that right and I don't think him being right can be just called pure luck.

As far as Mercedes was concerned the fact is at the time it was seen that Mercedes needed him more than he needed Mercedes, believe what you want to believe but it's no coincidence that Mercedes started pumping more money into the race team after Hamilton was signed and that's why I believe it was so important for the likes of Brawn and Lauda to convince Hamilton to join the team, 2012 was a very bad year for Mercedes, the race team was under financed and floundering.

As far as Schumacher contributing to the design of the car because he happened to pound around Fiorana is just really applying some kind of double standard without any actual proof, the designers design the car, saying that Schumacher contributed more to the development of a car moreso than Hamilton at Mercedes is totally unproven, what contributed more were the massive budgets of both teams.

Mercedes started pumping more money in after Wolff got there. He was able to do more in that regard than Brawn had done. You talk about believing what you want to believe but you are attributing things to Hamilton just because you want them to be true. Wolff was the money man.

There's no double standard and it's hard to believe you've actually read my posts when you spout something like that. I've already mentioned - twice - that drivers are no longer able to do that anymore as computers have largely taken that away from them, which wasn't the case with previous eras. And regulations make testing so much more limited now. Only you could see that as a slight against Hamilton when I specifically said that's no fault of the drivers themselves.

Mercedes went for Hamilton because he was one of the best drivers available and he was known to be unhappy at McLaren. All teams are constantly on the lookout for top talent. It's well documented that Hamilton went knocking on the doors at Red Bull before Bernie persuaded him to look seriously at Mercedes. But again, it's very ironic that the team he settled at were the ones with an even worse track record of letting their drivers down that McLaren had, so I think him seeing McLaren as unable to provide him with titles as a true reason for the move to Mercedes doesn't bear up to scrutiny. It's likely there were other reasons for his unhappiness there and it's even possible that he just felt he needed to grow. The rest was just luck - see Alonso at McLaren to illustrate the point


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Schumacher achieved what he did mainly because he was the best driver in F1 for a decade and also let's not forget Ferrari had the biggest budget, as for Schumacher actually developing the car he was said not to be that good as a test driver because he would drive around problems with the car.

I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

Weird, I did not mention Hamilton at all, no idea why you always have to bring Hamilton in every conversation. I replied to how Schumacher brought personnel. Not by hiring them directly obviously


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Schumacher did not develop any F1 car and he also did not built a team around him. He drove faster and better than most and more successful than anyone - and that should be enough, really.

Todt and di Montezemolo bought out the successful team from Benetton and threw much more money on them than Benetton ever could. And that was a hugely successful strategy!

Edit: The times of Jack Brabham were long over by then.


He didn't hire the engineers around him obviously. Todt is the unsung hero in the Ferrari revival. He did built a "team" though and set the standards to a different level at that time. He would know everyone by first name in the factory, send flowers to personnel that had birthdays, went to their kids parties. A big deal too for a private, shy introvert like he was. You'll find that he did a lot more behind the scenes for his team than other drivers and he won their loyalty. Made them rally around him. It really does make a difference when you work with someone like that, you may have experienced this at your own workplace. Do not underestimate what that does to a team.

As for the team itself, I remember a story when he first visited the factory that a car was leaking and the engineer just wiped the floor, that was the state of the team back then. Schumacher made the guy take the car apart and find the problem, fix it. I can't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt if you wish. But it is reported time and again what work he did behind the scenes in that team.

Cr*p, you made me sound like a boyband fanboy now!

Spotting a leak and realising there is a problem is quite standard stuff, it says less of the mechanic rather than more of Schumacher.

As true as this is, it points to the fact that he changed a lot in the mentality at the team at that time as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Schumacher did not develop any F1 car and he also did not built a team around him. He drove faster and better than most and more successful than anyone - and that should be enough, really.

Todt and di Montezemolo bought out the successful team from Benetton and threw much more money on them than Benetton ever could. And that was a hugely successful strategy!

Edit: The times of Jack Brabham were long over by then.


He didn't hire the engineers around him obviously. Todt is the unsung hero in the Ferrari revival. He did built a "team" though and set the standards to a different level at that time. He would know everyone by first name in the factory, send flowers to personnel that had birthdays, went to their kids parties. A big deal too for a private, shy introvert like he was. You'll find that he did a lot more behind the scenes for his team than other drivers and he won their loyalty. Made them rally around him. It really does make a difference when you work with someone like that, you may have experienced this at your own workplace. Do not underestimate what that does to a team.

As for the team itself, I remember a story when he first visited the factory that a car was leaking and the engineer just wiped the floor, that was the state of the team back then. Schumacher made the guy take the car apart and find the problem, fix it. I can't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt if you wish. But it is reported time and again what work he did behind the scenes in that team.

Cr*p, you made me sound like a boyband fanboy now!


The comparison you draw in your final sentence is actually quite accurate. One of the big innovations off the track was that stories like the ones you report were actively publicized and promoted. There are similar stories about Piquet or Villeneuve (Gilles) and others regarding socializing within the team - just with less marketing efforts.

Schumacher shy and introvert? Well, I met him several times when he did F3 - and these were certainly not fitting attributes.

One of the absolute greatest drivers ever and a huge tragedy post-career. I am still feeling shocked and in disbelief when I think of his state today. He deserves so much credit, he really does not need the myths.

I have never met him personally, but it is (again) reported widely that he kept to himself a lot, kept his private family away from the limelight to the point that people were mistaking his shyness for attitude and arrogance. James Allen's book has a whole section on that. So yeah, I tend to believe Allen as he has met him a lot of times. Introvert is probably the wrong word as English is not my first language, but I hope you get what I mean.

Also, it really is not a myth that he brought the team together, it is well known and documented how he went the extra mile to motivate and keep a happy team compared to his fellow drivers at the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think you're projecting here. Hamilton didn't see the writing on the wall at McLaren. At least, there's no evidence that's the case and I don't think even he has claimed that. He left because he was disillusioned with the number of errors and mishaps that were occurring (and ironically left to go to a team with an arguably worse track record in that regard), coupled with alleged unhappiness about his contract terms (who gets to keep trophies etc) and Bernie orchestrated a move for him to Mercedes. By all accounts he needed persuasion to do that, as he wasn't initially convinced about Mercedes at all.

What eventually happened at McLaren is irrelevant to Hamilton's motivation. I'll bet the farm that no-one could possibly have foreseen just how low they'd sink. Likewise, Hamilton didn't have some magic crystal ball that would have told him just how dominant the Mercedes would become, in the same way that Alonso didn't have a faulty one when he re-joined McLaren with their Honda partnership. They were sold exactly the same dream and the only difference is that the engineers came good on the Mercedes side. Let's not get carried away and imbue anyone with special powers of perception here. And those dreams were also lined with massive retainers.

The writing on the wall was his belief that McLaren were incapable of winning titles, most of the rest that you say I wouldn't really look to disagree with apart from the size of retainer which was no bigger than McLaren offered him.

At least you are highlighting the level of risk that Hamilton took more than this kind of view that everything gets gifted to him, it seems like unless success takes several years to find then it's gifted?

I agree he took a risk when he left McLaren for Mercedes. It was by no means a sure thing and it's easy to write it off as so with hindsight.

But that's not the same as saying he foresaw anything. He didn't seek out Mercedes, nor did he have any special powers of perception that told him Mercedes would be the team to beat going forward, or that McLaren would take a dive. I really don't see any difference with Alonso's decision to go with McLaren-Honda; it's just luck that makes one driver look incredibly wise and the other poor at making decisions, but neither contributed to the end result beyond driving what the engineers produced for them.

And that's not a reflection of either driver, either. Like I've already pointed out, drivers are much more limited now with how they can contribute to a car's development than they were in Schumacher's (first) time. Everything is done with computers and simulations now, not seat of the pants driving

He went with what he felt was right in leaving McLaren, he saw how they operated and he left, he called that right and I don't think him being right can be just called pure luck.

As far as Mercedes was concerned the fact is at the time it was seen that Mercedes needed him more than he needed Mercedes, believe what you want to believe but it's no coincidence that Mercedes started pumping more money into the race team after Hamilton was signed and that's why I believe it was so important for the likes of Brawn and Lauda to convince Hamilton to join the team, 2012 was a very bad year for Mercedes, the race team was under financed and floundering.

As far as Schumacher contributing to the design of the car because he happened to pound around Fiorana is just really applying some kind of double standard without any actual proof, the designers design the car, saying that Schumacher contributed more to the development of a car moreso than Hamilton at Mercedes is totally unproven, what contributed more were the massive budgets of both teams.

Mercedes started pumping more money in after Wolff got there. He was able to do more in that regard than Brawn had done. You talk about believing what you want to believe but you are attributing things to Hamilton just because you want them to be true. Wolff was the money man.

There's no double standard and it's hard to believe you've actually read my posts when you spout something like that. I've already mentioned - twice - that drivers are no longer able to do that anymore as computers have largely taken that away from them, which wasn't the case with previous eras. And regulations make testing so much more limited now. Only you could see that as a slight against Hamilton when I specifically said that's no fault of the drivers themselves.

Mercedes went for Hamilton because he was one of the best drivers available and he was known to be unhappy at McLaren. All teams are constantly on the lookout for top talent. It's well documented that Hamilton went knocking on the doors at Red Bull before Bernie persuaded him to look seriously at Mercedes. But again, it's very ironic that the team he settled at were the ones with an even worse track record of letting their drivers down that McLaren had, so I think him seeing McLaren as unable to provide him with titles as a true reason for the move to Mercedes doesn't bear up to scrutiny. It's likely there were other reasons for his unhappiness there and it's even possible that he just felt he needed to grow. The rest was just luck - see Alonso at McLaren to illustrate the point

+1 Zoue. I can't spot in your post where you said that Schumacher designed the car. Maybe because you said developed, but Poker seems to see red in this thread


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 12:49 am
Posts: 312
Brabham.

But he did not do so as a driver. I think car designers, team managers etc take teams from 0 to hero.

Drivers can take a team from near hero to hero... but they to be close already.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Prema wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman. You win. Schumi didn't do anything to make Ferrari better. All he did was drive, oh and maybe something of relatively little significance... such as motivate. He had basically no effect on the team's growth whatsoever... certainly did not do anything more, if as much, than Lewis has done, after all he brought Paddy Lowe too. In fact, he may have done even less, as it has already been pointed out that it took several more years for Big Budget Ferrari to win than it did the guys at Hamilton/Mercedes, so I guess you can make the case that Schumi just have been a liability instead. Darn Schumi... Thank gawd that we had Luca and Todt!

;)

A drivers either contributes to a team or he doesn't?

In your definition Schumacher gets a 10 and Hamilton gets a big fact zero and there seemingly is no middle ground.


Why are we talking "Hamilton, Hamilton, Hamilton..." here? Why not "Vettel, Vettel, Vettel, Vettel"? :?
Well, I guess, because it is a well known fact that Vettel got his rocket ship from Newey, while Hamilton made one for himself. ;)

Like I guess Schumacher also made one for himself?

_________________
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 Apr 13, 2018 2:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
I don't think anybody in their right mind believes that Schumacher literally developed the car to be a world-beater. The last driver who did that was possibly Niki Lauda, if it wasn't even earlier. Schumi just got the right people into the team, and then motivated them with the fact that they had the best driver.

Hamilton didn't bring a whole raft of technical people from McLaren with him, so I'd have to say it's hard to make a parallel there.

Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

Weird, I did not mention Hamilton at all, no idea why you always have to bring Hamilton in every conversation. I replied to how Schumacher brought personnel. Not by hiring them directly obviously

You jumped into posts comparing Schumacher with Hamilton.

_________________
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 Apr 13, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6628
pokerman wrote:
Prema wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman. You win. Schumi didn't do anything to make Ferrari better. All he did was drive, oh and maybe something of relatively little significance... such as motivate. He had basically no effect on the team's growth whatsoever... certainly did not do anything more, if as much, than Lewis has done, after all he brought Paddy Lowe too. In fact, he may have done even less, as it has already been pointed out that it took several more years for Big Budget Ferrari to win than it did the guys at Hamilton/Mercedes, so I guess you can make the case that Schumi just have been a liability instead. Darn Schumi... Thank gawd that we had Luca and Todt!

;)

A drivers either contributes to a team or he doesn't?

In your definition Schumacher gets a 10 and Hamilton gets a big fact zero and there seemingly is no middle ground.


Why are we talking "Hamilton, Hamilton, Hamilton..." here? Why not "Vettel, Vettel, Vettel, Vettel"? :?
Well, I guess, because it is a well known fact that Vettel got his rocket ship from Newey, while Hamilton made one for himself. ;)

Like I guess Schumacher also made one for himself?


Well, at least Schumacher is famous for testing like obsessed in the one, apart from racing in it, as well as spending his time with the team and pushing everybody.

Here is the issue with you on this one, as I see it. Even if there was nothing real but only a widely spread myth among F1 fans about Schumacher's involvement in building the winning car/team, you won't mind it at all so long so that same could be attached to Hamilton's name too, and so only while at the same time Vettel and Alonso are to be kept away from it - you won't allow that same glory to them, for otherwise it would devaluate it for Hamilton. Only Schumi and Hammy. Or nobody.

And since you can't establish that myth about your Hamilton because you got nothing of any concrete value that to impress with, then you won't tolerate Schumacher's fame either, then go back and try to strip him from it simply on the base of your Hamilton not getting it.
(Trump's art of deal-making in display, looks to me like)

Well, it ain't working either way. Myth or no myth, Schumacher did go down into fans' F1 history as such. Hamilton didn't, nor he will.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2033
iano wrote:
Brabham.

But he did not do so as a driver. I think car designers, team managers etc take teams from 0 to hero.

Drivers can take a team from near hero to hero... but they to be close already.


Brabham did drive his own car to win races and the wdc.
He was the last one who really developed his own car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2033
Siao7 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Schumacher did not develop any F1 car and he also did not built a team around him. He drove faster and better than most and more successful than anyone - and that should be enough, really.

Todt and di Montezemolo bought out the successful team from Benetton and threw much more money on them than Benetton ever could. And that was a hugely successful strategy!

Edit: The times of Jack Brabham were long over by then.


He didn't hire the engineers around him obviously. Todt is the unsung hero in the Ferrari revival. He did built a "team" though and set the standards to a different level at that time. He would know everyone by first name in the factory, send flowers to personnel that had birthdays, went to their kids parties. A big deal too for a private, shy introvert like he was. You'll find that he did a lot more behind the scenes for his team than other drivers and he won their loyalty. Made them rally around him. It really does make a difference when you work with someone like that, you may have experienced this at your own workplace. Do not underestimate what that does to a team.

As for the team itself, I remember a story when he first visited the factory that a car was leaking and the engineer just wiped the floor, that was the state of the team back then. Schumacher made the guy take the car apart and find the problem, fix it. I can't remember where I read this, so take it with a pinch of salt if you wish. But it is reported time and again what work he did behind the scenes in that team.

Cr*p, you made me sound like a boyband fanboy now!


The comparison you draw in your final sentence is actually quite accurate. One of the big innovations off the track was that stories like the ones you report were actively publicized and promoted. There are similar stories about Piquet or Villeneuve (Gilles) and others regarding socializing within the team - just with less marketing efforts.

Schumacher shy and introvert? Well, I met him several times when he did F3 - and these were certainly not fitting attributes.

One of the absolute greatest drivers ever and a huge tragedy post-career. I am still feeling shocked and in disbelief when I think of his state today. He deserves so much credit, he really does not need the myths.

I have never met him personally, but it is (again) reported widely that he kept to himself a lot, kept his private family away from the limelight to the point that people were mistaking his shyness for attitude and arrogance. James Allen's book has a whole section on that. So yeah, I tend to believe Allen as he has met him a lot of times. Introvert is probably the wrong word as English is not my first language, but I hope you get what I mean.
.


When saying shy and introvert are the wrong attributes, I did not mean to imply the opposite or even arrogance, not at all. I met an open young guy, very determined, who had no problems talking to people and approaching people.
But, of course, he was very young than. And had no family yet (you probably know about the girlfriend story with Frentzen).

Obviously, I cannot say anything about later years, but you usually do not develop to become shy, do you?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well that's what seems to have been implied plus Schumacher personally did not get anyone into the team, that was Jean Todt with a bucket full of cash, the motivating with his performance I would not disagree with.

You will find that a big name attracts the best personnel, sponsors, etc. He didn't personally go out knocking door, I don't think so

You think that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors?

Also I believe it's already been pointed out that Ferrari basically bought out part of the Benetton title winning team.

Weird, I did not mention Hamilton at all, no idea why you always have to bring Hamilton in every conversation. I replied to how Schumacher brought personnel. Not by hiring them directly obviously

You jumped into posts comparing Schumacher with Hamilton.
And Lauda. And Brabham. Just stop putting words in my mouth, I didn't say that Hamilton doesn't attract sponsors, just that Today + a big name in the team attracted the best people at the time at Ferrari. Jesus, you are becoming tiring with the Hamilton love fest


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: Greenman, lucifers, MB-BOB, Turnip Racer, UnlikeUday 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