Will someone ban Ferrari from F1?

[jaytip nsx]

F1 will see it's changes and surrendering of the top of the mountain in due time.

i agree,but i dont think it will happen until schumacher retires.the fact that rubens(who has won a few races,so is obviously a good driver)is often beaten by drivers from other teams,yet schumacher is consistantly in the top three,and yet the cars are equal.bennerton only ever won two world championships and who was the driver;
schumacher

 

[cmhs75]

No body doubts Schumacher's ability to drive. It's just that some, me included, would doubt his ability to dominate as he does now if it wasn't for the monopolizing tactics of Ferrari in F1.

And about what Senna did to Prost. Those two should be left alone. No competition in the whole F1 history was as fears as the one between Senna and Prost. I recall that Prost did something to Senna in a previous race before that race. I just don't remember what. And Senna got back at him at that race.

Anyway, Senna and Prost were two of the top F1 drivers in history and they were battling it out in a competition so fierce, it would make Schumacher wet his pants. Don’t get between two real men. And don't try to apply rules to explain their actions. This is something that was between Senna and Prost. Leave it at that.

 

[nkb]

No body doubts Schumacher's ability to drive. It's just that some, me included, would doubt his ability to dominate as he does now if it wasn't for the monopolizing tactics of Ferrari in F1.

So, what happened at Benneton, then?
I'm not sure what it would take to convince you of Schumacher's superior abilities, if 6 championships (2 in an inferior car) aren't enough. In addition, when he came to Ferrari, they had not won in forever, it's not like he jumped to a team that had the best car. He is part of a team that has designed an amazing series of cars that the others are still trying to catch up to. What does he need to do, jump in a go-kart, and beat F1 cars?

Don’t get between two real men. And don't try to apply rules to explain their actions. This is something that was between Senna and Prost. Leave it at that.

It's laughable at how you can dismiss Senna's questionable actions as "man's man type of competition, don't question it", yet you jump on Schumacher for the same thing, and call him dirty.

I'd like to add that I am not a huge fan of Schumacher, but I can not help but admire at how amazing a racer he is (and, in my book, as stated before, that involves more than just driving fast for a few laps). He is absolutely dominant, albeit in a dominant car, but he has proven himself by winning in any car. How can you argue with his unprecedented results?

 

[effer]

yeah, the credibility of your argument is definitely enhanced by the tactic of name-calling (shoe maker, scum maker, et c.)

It goes on par with the guy's attitude and fairplay level and OTOH we must not fall in the mistake of confusing form and content.

schumi crashed at silverstone in 99 due to brake failure, which happened to be a mistake made by the TEAM. racing is a TEAM sport, shumi's just doing his part.

Can you prove it? Do you have access to Ferrari real telemetry numbers? What privileged informations do you have?

I don't want to start a war but this hasn't been proved yet...

They can say anything, especially if it can help their number 1 driver...

Facts are that Irvine was replaced by Barrichello the following year and that Irvine said during season that he didn't want to play anymore the number two driver role...

About the TEAM argument I unfortunately think ( and I'm not the only one... ) the TEAM Ferrari is obsessed by the end justifies the means.

Isn't true that similar people have the tendency to join together? So do the cheaters...


Remember the Austrian Grand Prix....

and we wouldn't want to forget that SENNA took out PROST in turn 1 at the start of the japanese grand prix (can't recall the year, exactly), thereby making senna the champ.

Absolutely and Senna kind of introduced that trend which was hugely enhanced by "Chew Make Her".

This is why I tend to prefer Prost over Senna...but I way much prefer Senna over "The Cheater in Red".

If I remember correctly, you are referring to the incident that was even called by Senna himself before the race ( Senna said to journalists that he would hit Prost's gearbox if he would be in front of him in first turn ) where Prost was going to win the driver's championship with... Ferrari!

I am ROTFLMAO when I hear people saying that the "Teutonic Master Cheater" did the impossible with Ferrari!

Prost was going to achieve it about ten years before...


Regards,

Effer

 

[nkb]

Facts are that Irvine was replaced by Barrichello the following year and that Irvine said during season that he didn't want to play anymore the number two driver role...

Fact is that Irvine is a mediocre driver, who thinks much more highly of himself than is justified. What has Irvine shown, since he left Ferrari? Absolutely nothing!
I think Barichello is a much more accomplished driver, and more of a team player. That is why he replaced Irvine.

 

[nkb]

I am ROTFLMAO when I hear people saying that the "Teutonic Master Cheater" did the impossible with Ferrari!

Prost was going to achieve it about ten years before...

Who said Schumacher did the impossible with Ferrari? I don't think that statement was ever made.
What Schumacher did was contribute to an incredibly dominant car design, and then used his incredible driving talents to further the domination. How this is cheating, I'm not quite clear on.

Can you clarify the Prost statement, you lost me on that one?Prost was a great driver, but, in my opinion, not quite in the same class as Schumacher. (I've always been more of a Niki Lauda fan myself).

 

[cmhs75]

So, what happened at Benneton, then?
I'm not sure what it would take to convince you of Schumacher's superior abilities, if 6 championships (2 in an inferior car) aren't enough. In addition, when he came to Ferrari, they had not won in forever, it's not like he jumped to a team that had the best car. He is part of a team that has designed an amazing series of cars that the others are still trying to catch up to. What does he need to do, jump in a go-kart, and beat F1 cars?

It's laughable at how you can dismiss Senna's questionable actions as "man's man type of competition, don't question it", yet you jump on Schumacher for the same thing, and call him dirty.

I'd like to add that I am not a huge fan of Schumacher, but I can not help but admire at how amazing a racer he is (and, in my book, as stated before, that involves more than just driving fast for a few laps). He is absolutely dominant, albeit in a dominant car, but he has proven himself by winning in any car. How can you argue with his unprecedented results?

Benetton wasn't under performing, just look at the previous Schumacher sidekick's end point standing and you'll see. Although I don’t like to use statistics to judge good driving but here you go


While driving at Benetton

Position : Schumacher : Sidekick

1991 : 14 : 10
1992 : 3 : 6
1993 : 4 : 5
1994 : 1 : 10
1995 : 1 : 4


Aside from 1994, Schumacher was never that far off from his partner driving the same if not inferior car. That proves that Schumacher is no superhero in F1. He was just the right guy at the right time. This is not denying his talent and ability, but he is overrated.

And about me dismissing Ayrton Senna's action as a manly battle between two of the greatest F1 drivers who ever lived. Well, I stand my ground. If you look at the seasons that are between 1988 and 1993, you'll see Prost and Senna all over the charts. It was like there were no other competitors for the championship. And this competition between them went on regardless of the car they were each driving; wither inferior or superior, teammate or not teammate they were at each other's throat all the time. The competition between them was so fierce that in one of the seasons they won all but one race in the whole season. They split the point between them and they were both on the same team! If that's not the fiercest competition in the history of F1 I don't know what is. This could not be allowed to happen today, Michael Schumacher would never allow his teammate to challenge him for the title, that's why Montoya declined the offer to join Ferrari in a previous season. And Ferrari would never risk the drivers champion, they would just let their pet Schumacher win all the races and call him talented. Schumacher would never survive such high competition. But, hey, in a world of numbers, who would ever know.

 

[cmhs75]

Who said Schumacher did the impossible with Ferrari? I don't think that statement was ever made.
What Schumacher did was contribute to an incredibly dominant car design, and then used his incredible driving talents to further the domination. How this is cheating, I'm not quite clear on.

Can you clarify the Prost statement, you lost me on that one?Prost was a great driver, but, in my opinion, not quite in the same class as Schumacher. (I've always been more of a Niki Lauda fan myself).

Prost won 4 titles and was the second runner-up for 4 times. And at the time, he had a so called Ayrton Senna to push back, not to mention three time world champion Niki Lauda and a host of other super talented mega experienced racers to challenge. Prost is every bit as good as Michael Schumacher, if not better. Schumacher never had any real competition since Senna died. Not until recent years have we seen real talent come to challenge Schumacher. And all of them are too young and inexperienced to really put the pressure on him and show what kind of man he is. Only then can he be compared to the likes of prost Lauda and Senna.

 

[nkb]

Benetton wasn't under performing, just look at the previous Schumacher sidekick's end point standing and you'll see. Although I don’t like to use statistics to judge good driving but here you go

How many championships did Bennetton win before Schumacher? How many have they won since he left? Are you saying that Schumacher got really lucky, and Bennetton happened to have one of the best cars while he was there?

While driving at Benetton

Position : Schumacher : Sidekick
1991 : 14 : 10
1992 : 3 : 6
1993 : 4 : 5
1994 : 1 : 10
1995 : 1 : 4

Aside from 1994, Schumacher was never that far off from his partner driving the same if not inferior car. That proves that Schumacher is no superhero in F1. He was just the right guy at the right time. This is not denying his talent and ability, but he is overrated.

Explain to me again how this proves anything, except that he was consistently better than his teammate? Except for his first year in F1 and with Bennetton, he consistently beat his sidekicks. In his 2nd year, he came in 3rd!!! Yeah, you're right, he sucks.
Nobody ever said he was a superhero. Nobody expects a driver to come into F1 and immediately dominate (especially in an inferior car). I refer to my earlier question: What does MS have to do to prove he is a great driver, beat F1 cars in a go-kart?

And about me dismissing Ayrton Senna's action as a manly battle between two of the greatest F1 drivers who ever lived. Well, I stand my ground. If you look at the seasons that are between 1988 and 1993, you'll see Prost and Senna all over the charts. It was like there were no other competitors for the championship. And this competition between them went on regardless of the car they were each driving; wither inferior or superior, teammate or not teammate they were at each other's throat all the time. The competition between them was so fierce that in one of the seasons they won all but one race in the whole season. They split the point between them and they were both on the same team! If that's not the fiercest competition in the history of F1 I don't know what is. This could not be allowed to happen today, Michael Schumacher would never allow his teammate to challenge him for the title, that's why Montoya declined the offer to join Ferrari in a previous season. And Ferrari would never risk the drivers champion, they would just let their pet Schumacher win all the races and call him talented. Schumacher would never survive such high competition. But, hey, in a world of numbers, who would ever know.

This is obviously a subjective argument, but what if, despite your personal dislike for Schumacher (which I think is clouding your judgement), he really is THAT good? Maybe that is why he is dominating, and nobody appears competitive? Maybe if MS wasn't around, there might be a fierce competition between Montoya and Barichello, for example, and you would later reminisce about the battle between the great Juan Pablo and Rubens?
Who's to say that MS, if he was in his prime at the same time that Prost and Senna were dominating F1, wouldn't beat them consistently? Who knows?
That's like comparing Pele and Maradona, or Wilt Chamberlain and Michael Jordan. They didn't play against each other in their prime, so who was really better? You could argue forever, and never come to a consensus.

 

[nkb]

Prost won 4 titles and was the second runner-up for 4 times. And at the time, he had a so called Ayrton Senna to push back, not to mention three time world champion Niki Lauda and a host of other super talented mega experienced racers to challenge. Prost is every bit as good as Michael Schumacher, if not better. Schumacher never had any real competition since Senna died. Not until recent years have we seen real talent come to challenge Schumacher. And all of them are too young and inexperienced to really put the pressure on him and show what kind of man he is. Only then can he be compared to the likes of prost Lauda and Senna.

OK, I guess Schumacher must be the luckiest man alive then. It just so happens that during his 6 championships, there are no other excellent drivers around. What a fortuitous turn of events!

Or is it possible that he really is THAT good, and he happens to be dominating drivers who otherwise might be considered great?

As mentioned earlier, my favorite F1 driver is Lauda, but even I can admit that MS is probably the superior driver. I'm not letting my emotions do the talking, I am just going by indisputable results.

 

[cmhs75]

I don’t hate Schumacher. I'm just not a fan and would never rate him as high as Prost and Senna.

Your argument about the probability of Schumacher's non existence would still not prove your point. From 1950 up to 2003, how many F1 drivers' champions are there. About 25. Now, if only being a not so talented champion among a breed of not so talented drivers, would make you a legend then we would have 25 drivers in the F1 hall of fame. But, this is not the case. The truth is that there are about seven people in F1 history that are so famous. And one of them never got a drivers champion ever! And he's still famous. True Talent always shines threw no matter what the numbers are. And, vice versa, less talented drivers will never take the aura of superior drivers no matter what the numbers say 7 times world champion or even 10 times world champion. That's why most of the F1 critics today rank Senna higher than Schumacher.

John Pablo is too early in his carrier to defeat Schumacher yet and Barrichello is just small fry. Prost, Ayrton, Lauda, and Mansell were world champions, there is a big difference.

 

[nkb]

I don’t hate Schumacher. I'm just not a fan and would never rate him as high as Prost and Senna.

Your argument about the probability of Schumacher's non existence would still not prove your point. From 1950 up to 2003, how many F1 drivers' champions are there. About 25. Now, if only being a not so talented champion among a breed of not so talented drivers, would make you a legend then we would have 25 drivers in the F1 hall of fame. But, this is not the case. The truth is that there are about seven people in F1 history that are so famous. And one of them never got a drivers champion ever! And he's still famous. True Talent always shines threw no matter what the numbers are. And, vice versa, less talented drivers will never take the aura of superior drivers no matter what the numbers say 7 times world champion or even 10 times world champion. That's why most of the F1 critics today rank Senna higher than Schumacher.

John Pablo is too early in his carrier to defeat Schumacher yet and Barrichello is just small fry. Prost, Ayrton, Lauda, and Mansell were world champions, there is a big difference.

OK, I give up. What would Schumacher have to do to convince you that he is one of the greatest F1 drivers ever? Win a title with Minardi? And if he did that, would you start saying that he got lucky, because Minardi happened to come up with a better car when he switched to them?
It seems to me, that no matter what, since you have decided that Schumacher is not one of the best drivers, no amount of proof will sway your opinion.
It seems to me that you are confusing driving talent with charisma. Schumacher is one of the least charismatic champions, I will grant you that. Maybe that is part of the reason why some people still don't accept him.

However, I still say that you can't argue with 6 (!!!) championships, with 2 different teams.

And your statement that "most of the F1 critics today rank Senna higher than Schumacher" is pulled straight of your rectal region. There is definitely a debate going on about who is better, but I think the opinions are probably evenly divided.

And, lastly, how can you even put Mansell in that group? Shame on you!

 

[effer]

Fact is that Irvine is a mediocre driver, who thinks much more highly of himself than is justified.
I think Barichello is a much more accomplished driver, ...

I agree nkb! Not a mediocre driver in the real sense of word but I understand what you mean...

What has Irvine shown, since he left Ferrari? Absolutely nothing!

He was unlucky to ride in the highly underperforming Jaguar...
A shame considering what Stewart Ford achieved the year before.

and more of a team player. That is why he replaced Irvine.

This is absolutely possible but there is a lot of people thinking Irvine got enough of playing "Darth Maker" or "Schum Vader" valet's role.

For some: "more of a team player" can be judged as the opposite of self pride...

Who said Schumacher did the impossible with Ferrari? I don't think that statement was ever made.

I wasn't referring to replies from here.

Can you clarify the Prost statement, you lost me on that one?Prost was a great driver, but, in my opinion, not quite in the same class as Schumacher. (I've always been more of a Niki Lauda fan myself).

Cmhs75 is right on with his answer. The only thing I can add is Prost should have won easily 6 titles and maybe one more if we consider this:


For sure 6 titles because:

He lost one with Renault ( in 1982 I think... ) because the technical manager didn't put a protest against the winner who was using illegal fuel ( Piquet in the BMW Brabham ).

It was rumored that Renault's TM didn't put it at the FIA because Prost had an affair with his wife!!! He got his revenge!


He lost the other with Ferrari because Senna hit him by behind on purpose.

Senna should have been disqualified but nothing happened.
Ironically, Senna even announced in public before race his intention to hit Prost! If this isn't premeditation???

So Prost would have been the first to win the driver's championship since Jody Schekter who won his only title due to a gentleman agreement of Villeneuve father ( Gilles let Jody win the title believing that he would have all his time to do so in the future... )



Maybe 7 titles because: ( but this is only pure speculation )

He lost by half a point to Lauda if I remember correctly
( I let you discover why! Hint: Big rainy race controversially stopped... ),

that season should have ended by a draw between Prost and Lauda where Prost would have been favored with better overall results...

The smallest winning difference ever in F1 history!



Cheers everybody!

 

[effer]

...not to mention three time world champion Niki Lauda and a host of other super talented mega experienced racers to challenge. Prost is every bit as good as Michael Schumacher, if not better.

Better IMO. Prost almost won titles with 4 different stable:

Renault, Ferrari, Mc Laren and Williams...when competion was harder...

Schumacher never had any real competition since Senna died. Not until recent years have we seen real talent come to challenge Schumacher. And all of them are too young and inexperienced to really put the pressure on him and show what kind of man he is. Only then can he be compared to the likes of prost Lauda and Senna.

Not exactly true because I believe that Villeneuve ( Jacques ) and Hakkinen were able to win over him. Especially Villeneuve which I believe to be the best guy to beat him with an identical car.

Remember Nurburgring Grand Prix of 1996. Rookie year of Villeneuve.

Today I would like to see Montoya, Raikkonen, Webber or Alonso stablemate of "Boo May Occur"!

 

[effer]

What would Schumacher have to do to convince you that he is one of the greatest F1 drivers ever?

Quite simple:

To win without hitting on purpose other drivers nor zigzaging in front of faster cars to keep his beforehand position

and

accepting to compete like a gentleman against the best stablemate Ferrari could find.

In fact to prove that he can win in a real fierce competition situation.


Remember, "Choo! Choo! Make Car" is the ONLY driver in all the F1 history to have been disqualified in the final ranking of a full season ( he lost his vice champion ranking in 1997 after the Villeneuve's incident at Jerez and all his season points were also cancelled ).

Sorry for monopolizing replies in this thread, this is an interesting and irrefutable* discussion subject.

I hope I brought some light ... ( and I don't mean that this is "thruth", only different ways of appreciating events... )

God bless every F1 and NSX fans!



* So I don't expect to prove that I am right!

 

[cmhs75]

OK, I give up. What would Schumacher have to do to convince you that he is one of the greatest F1 drivers ever? Win a title with Minardi? And if he did that, would you start saying that he got lucky, because Minardi happened to come up with a better car when he switched to them?
It seems to me, that no matter what, since you have decided that Schumacher is not one of the best drivers, no amount of proof will sway your opinion.
It seems to me that you are confusing driving talent with charisma. Schumacher is one of the least charismatic champions, I will grant you that. Maybe that is part of the reason why some people still don't accept him.

However, I still say that you can't argue with 6 (!!!) championships, with 2 different teams.

And your statement that "most of the F1 critics today rank Senna higher than Schumacher" is pulled straight of your rectal region. There is definitely a debate going on about who is better, but I think the opinions are probably evenly divided.

And, lastly, how can you even put Mansell in that group? Shame on you!

these are a few websites that are not pulled right out of my rectal region

http://8w.forix.com/poll1res.html


http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/3168114.stm?display=1



http://pub103.ezboard.com/fsoccertalk55132frm74.showMessage?topicID=113.topic&pollResults=on


http://www.planet-f1.com/Features/Letters/story_13621.shtml

http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/ten.htm

and
OK I admit I made a bobo with my claim about Mansell. I take it back; I was a little bit emotional.

And just so we could end this, here is my personal real ranking of the greatest F1 drivers in history:

1- Ayrton Senna
2- Alain Prost
3- Michael Schumacher

I hope you don't have to prove anything to me anymore after this.

 

[gheba_nsx]

I almost feel that I could have won a couple championships too by using your calculation about the "seven wins" that should belong to Prost!

 

[cmhs75]

these are a few websites that are not pulled right out of my rectal region

http://8w.forix.com/poll1res.html


http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/3168114.stm?display=1



http://pub103.ezboard.com/fsoccertalk55132frm74.showMessage?topicID=113.topic&pollResults=on


http://www.planet-f1.com/Features/Letters/story_13621.shtml

http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/ten.htm

and
OK I admit I made a bobo with my claim about Mansell. I take it back; I was a little bit emotional.

And just so we could end this, here is my personal real ranking of the greatest F1 drivers in history:

1- Ayrton Senna
2- Alain Prost
3- Michael Schumacher

I hope you don't have to prove anything to me anymore after this.

So how about it, Shake hands and part way?

 

[nkb]

He was unlucky to ride in the highly underperforming Jaguar...

The unlucky excuse only works for so long. Irvine has done absolutely nothing since that one good year with Ferrari.

This is absolutely possible but there is a lot of people thinking Irvine got enough of playing "Darth Maker" or "Schum Vader" valet's role.

Yes, my point exactly, Irvine's head and ego got too big to be Schumacher's teammate, as opposed to the undisputed star. Boy, he showed the world, didn't he?

The only thing I can add is Prost should have won easily 6 titles ...

Oh, give me a break. What should have or could have happened can be discussed until we're all dead. What would Senna have done if he hadn't crashed and died? How many titles would Lauda have amassed if he hadn't had the horrific crash at Nurburgring, at the prime of his career?
And, I'm not putting much stock into your anecdotal evidence of why Prost didn't win those other championships, since they are only rumors or suppositions.

 

[nkb]

Quite simple:
To win without hitting on purpose other drivers ...

So, one questionable incident, where he caused an accident that benefitted him, and you discount 6 championships? So, therefore, Senna now is in the same boat, since he was even more blatant about it.

... nor zigzaging in front of faster cars to keep his beforehand position

No "zigzaging"? Are you serious? If that is not part of racing, why don't they just do time trials instead then? Defending your position during a race is PART OF RACING!!!! Nobody moves over to let the guy behind them go by (excluding lapped drivers), that is part of what they do. That's like saying a basketball player shouldn't try to block a shot or steal the ball.

accepting to compete like a gentleman against the best stablemate Ferrari could find.

I won't pretend to know what goes on behind the scenes, so I have no idea how much of this is Schumacher not wanting competition in his own back yard, and how much of it is Ferrari not wanting to screw up a good thing. But, you don't think every top driver wouldn't like to be in Schumacher's spot? Being the undisputed top guy on the top team. You don't think that Senna or Prost, if they had any say, would have preferred the same arrangement?

In fact to prove that he can win in a real fierce competition situation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he just win by 2 points last year? And, how is it his fault that, until last season, nobody challenged him? Do you think he should have thrown some races, just to make it more interesting?

 

[nkb]

these are a few websites that are not pulled right out of my rectal region

Please reread my post. Your statement "most of the F1 critics today rank Senna higher than Schumacher" was rectally extracted, not the fact that some people believe Senna was the best.
Do you really think I can't find at least this many links arguing for Schumacher? Or Lauda? Or Prost? Or even Fangio? (well, maybe not Fangio)

 

[effer]

Hi every racing fans!

What should have or could have happened can be discussed until we're all dead.

True. But I wouldn't dive in pure speculation and we must consider these two missed championships as deserved and lost.

About the protest issue you will find all the information in serious F1 magazines and even books: F1 history officially recognizes it.

In the Senna riot issue, what can we say, Prost suffered from a poor commissioner decision and this is part of sport...

IMO Senna shouldn't be proud about this title... ( stolen à la "Choo! Smack Her!" )

I almost feel that I could have won a couple championships too by using your calculation about the "seven wins" that should belong to Prost.

Hope you would be able to do so, honestly, but you have to remember that I specified: maybe and added in parenthesis an important warning.

When do you plan to get your superlicence!

So, one questionable incident, where he caused an accident that benefitted him, and you discount 6 championships? So, therefore, Senna now is in the same boat, since he was even more blatant about it.

Only one questionable incident??? Far more than that.

All during his career we can find a lot of very questionable things he made. We do not talk about one single mistake but many many ones during a large spread of time...

Championship no1: underserved and in fact stolen to Damon Hill. ( use of illegal TCS device: see what 's following )

Championship no 2: underserved because of using prohibited TCS and fuel and car's flat bottom ( Did you know that Ayrton Senna himself as soon as 1994 suspected "Darthmacher" to use it: how many races was he watching him in his Benneton from the track border trying to hear something? )

Championship no 3 to 6: mostly deserved

( with lots of: ? & & & )

even though he got big help from FIA; who banned under Ferrari lobby the use of Be alloys for engine construction that annihilated Mercedes ( Illmor ) advantage, who tolerated Ferrari excessive and illegal amount of testing and tire use during race weekend, who permitted the use of electronic assisting devices and refusing it to Mc Laren...etc

even though he won over his stablemate by the power of contract ( at Ferrari, driver number 2 his strickly at number 1's service ), and always counted on Sauber ( Ferrari powered ) to slow down anybody catching up too quickly!

So fun to see sometimes, when they had a hard time with some opponents, Jean Todt running to the Sauber's garage... So Vaudevillesque!

even though he refused any real competition by accepting any stablemate free to compete with him at the same level ( i.e. same material and support ).

etc etc etc


What I suspect about this handicaped driver in terms of fairplayingness under pressure is:

he NEVER proved that he can win without cheating, hitting or benefiting of a dominant car and help from stablemate and FIA.

What's the deal to be gifted of a great driving talent when you can't even understand and apply the concept of fairplay?

No "zigzaging"? Are you serious? If that is not part of racing, why don't they just do time trials instead then? Defending your position during a race is PART OF RACING!!!! Nobody moves over to let the guy behind them go by (excluding lapped drivers), that is part of what they do. That's like saying a basketball player shouldn't try to block a shot or steal the ball.

OMG You seem to ignore a rule that was even brought by "Schum Vader" himself!!!!

We talk F1 rules here.

Not more than ONE direction change during overtaking manoeuvers.

That rule was accepted by the drivers board as far as 1999 ( if I remember correctly ) after an incident between him and Hill.

Of course every rules aren't written for his majesty himself but for all other F1 drivers!

How many times did he cheated on that one! Almost countless times...


If six championships do impress some people I ask this question:

Who's the richest person? The one having honestly earn 1M$ or the one having stolen 6M$?

As we can deduce there isn't only one answer and the latter depends on our morality and ours values.


nkb do you watch every F1 races?

If so, do you think there will be a Ferrari domination like 2002?

Cheers,

Effer

 

[cmhs75]

Please reread my post. Your statement "most of the F1 critics today rank Senna higher than Schumacher" was rectally extracted, not the fact that some people believe Senna was the best.
Do you really think I can't find at least this many links arguing for Schumacher? Or Lauda? Or Prost? Or even Fangio? (well, maybe not Fangio)

I didn't net pick these websites; I just opened GOOGLE, typed down "Greatest F1 driver" and posted the websites that had a comparison or a poll. That’s all
I wanted to prove that by the majority Senna is more highly regarded than Schumacher by posting websites I found randomly, not net picked. This proves it clear; Senna is the better driver, if not the more successful. And this was stated by numerous real F1 critics. Hell, even that Brundle guy who obviously doesn't like Senna stated that he was better than Schumacher, and that guy raced with both of them and new them too, so he is more than qualified to be the judge.

Effer, ROCK ON MAN

 

[nkb]

OK, here are some questions for everyone who thinks Schumacher is overrated, lucky, a cheater (take your pick):
1. Why does Ferrari pay him insane amounts of money to have him drive their race car?
If he really isn't that good, wouldn't they save a lot of money by giving a younger, more talented driver a contract for a lot less?
And, if their car is really that superior, that an overrated driver can dominate in it, wouldn't it make Ferrari look much better to have a less known driver winning championships?

2. Why does the FIA (according to effer) penalize everyone BUT Schumacher?
Everyone seems to agree that Ferrari's dominance is bad for F1. Competition is always good for the audience. Why would the FIA make exceptions for a guy who is already dominating? Does Ferrari or MS have incriminating pictures of Ecclestone with a goat?

3. If there really is some huge sort of conspiracy underway (Ferrari telling Sauber to slow other racers, for example), don't you think the FIA would investigate and do something about it?
I'm not buying that Ferrari has any say in what Sauber does during a race, just because they are using their engine.

 

[nkb]

Not more than ONE direction change during overtaking manoeuvers.

That rule was accepted by the drivers board as far as 1999 ( if I remember correctly ) after an incident between him and Hill.

Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by "zigzaging", I thought you were referring to the standard practice of driving a different line when being followed closely. My mistake.

nkb do you watch every F1 races?

If so, do you think there will be a Ferrari domination like 2002?

I have not watched either of the races this year, and only some of the races last year. In 2002, I caught every race.
After last season, I thought it would be a closer competition, but the early indication is that Ferrari might dominate like they did in 2002. Of course, it is still very early in the season, so who knows.