F1: Is Schuey the greatest driver of all time?

[the mooch]

I know this may stir up a hornets nest, but here goes......
As a long time follower of F1 and all things Red the last few years in F1 have been somewhat predictable. So much so that the question has to be asked. Is Michael Schumacher the greatest racing driver of all time? Is he better than Senna? Better the Fangio? Lets face it . no-one can catch him, let alone pass him. And it can't be all the car because his team-mate is good but Rubino has shown he can be beaten easily and regularly. I'm not trying to blow smoke up Schuey's arse, but is he really that good? Your thoughts, please.

[2Hands]

YEP!!! :bow:

[YIIR8]

He'd be in trouble if he had to drive a car ala V8 Supercars. Maybe the best F1, but he's definitely not the "greatest racing driver" of all time.
But then again......I'm comparing apples to oranges.

[Fabio's CV8]

If he wins the next race doesn't that mean he will hold the record for most consecutive rice wins ever?

[2Hands]

Just 2 more to go!
Most consecutive number of wins at the next round
Most number of Chamionships at the end of the season and then he has every record there is

[F6Mauz]

If he wins the next race doesn't that mean he will hold the record for most consecutive rice wins ever?

Yep.
And he currently has 59 pole positions and needs another 11-12 pole positions to break the record. If he breaks that i think he'll would have broken all the records.

[AussieTone]

In a word ...... YES

Some thought he appeared very stuck up and arrogent but have you noticed that the more time he spends with Ferrari the more mellow he appears. Must be the new Italian family heh. ;)

[GenX]

Definitely

And the reason i think hes the best going around now is his professional nature

a couple of thins being
1/ Remember the fire incident. He just sat there while is pit crew put out the fire. That is professionalism and trust in your team
2/ He ALWAYS wear’s his hat low so you can see the sponsors
3/ unlike some Pr**ks he doesn’t bag the car, pit crew, mechanics, engineers, marshals

:driving: professional

[the mooch]

He'd be in trouble if he had to drive a car ala V8 Supercars. Maybe the best F1, but he's definitely not the "greatest racing driver" of all time.
But then again......I'm comparing apples to oranges.
Just quietly I think if the Schu can fling an F1 car around at warp speed better than anyone, I'd say driving a V8 supercar would be a piece of cake for him. Lets face it, a V8 supercar doesn't try to distort your face or rearrange your internal organs everytime you round a corner. Nor does it try to pop your eyes out as savagely as an F1 does while braking. Of course I'm only guessing here. The V8's are by all accounts a brute to drive, but come on? 500kg x 900+hp and enough downforce to drive upside down at a measly 160kays versus 1350kg x 650hp and nowhere near the aero package? No, there is no comparison. What I really want to know is, throughout all of history, of all forms of motorsport at the highest level, is he the best?

[YIIR8]

Just quietly I think if the Schu can fling an F1 car around at warp speed better than anyone, I'd say driving a V8 supercar would be a piece of cake for him. Lets face it, a V8 supercar doesn't try to distort your face or rearrange your internal organs everytime you round a corner. Nor does it try to pop your eyes out as savagely as an F1 does while braking. Of course I'm only guessing here. The V8's are by all accounts a brute to drive, but come on? 500kg x 900+hp and enough downforce to drive upside down at a measly 160kays versus 1350kg x 650hp and nowhere near the aero package? No, there is no comparison. What I really want to know is, throughout all of history, of all forms of motorsport at the highest level, is he the best?

Think of the technology in F1 vs V8 Supercar.....totally different. An F1 can almost drive itself (exaggeration) vs a car where ya still have a H shifter.
That's why I said I'm comparing apples to oranges.....or chickens to turkeys.

You've gone from " greatest racing driver of all time" to "is he the best in all forms of motorsport" ??? You will not get a definitive answer.....what about Rossi that's floating around on only 2 wheels at the moment??
No doubt he's a very good driver, would of been interesting how he would of went years ago when technology wasn't as prevalent in F1's which are almost fully automated compared to yesteryear.

[brock05]

whilst he is very good, do you think he has the level of competition that Senna for instance had during his career with the likes of Mansell, Prost, Piquet etc If you look at who Schumacher has raced against with the exception of Villeneuve no one has more than a handful of wins and no one else has really beaten him on the track wheel to wheel. Whilst his record is the best and only going to get better I don't think he is the all time best as IMO he has one significant weakness and that is performance under pressure. Look at Adelaide 94 and Jerez 97, the only problem with F1 is that other teams/drivers are not in a position to put him under enough pressure regularly and cause errors etc. the other thing that has helped his record is Ferrari's exceptional reliability.

[WOT THE]

He is the best by far!!!!!! He has made Ferrari what it is today. Credit where it is due.

[The Warden]

whilst he is very good, do you think he has the level of competition that Senna for instance had during his career with the likes of Mansell, Prost, Piquet etc If you look at who Schumacher has raced against with the exception of Villeneuve no one has more than a handful of wins and no one else has really beaten him on the track wheel to wheel. Whilst his record is the best and only going to get better I don't think he is the all time best as IMO he has one significant weakness and that is performance under pressure. Look at Adelaide 94 and Jerez 97, the only problem with F1 is that other teams/drivers are not in a position to put him under enough pressure regularly and cause errors etc. the other thing that has helped his record is Ferrari's exceptional reliability.

Well argued points bloke, and I would generally agree. I'm no fan of the Schue, but 200 starts for 75 wins, speaks for itself..... in the words of Vince Martin (do you have VM in OZ don't you?): "BEAT THAT!"

YIIR8: It's not fair to point the bone at The Mooch he titled the tread about F1 & Schumacher, you're the bloke that mentioned V8 supercars..... :bash: :p

[V8BRUTE]

I will say up front I am no Ferrari fan but will admit there is nobody in F1 that can currently match him, he has the smarts, ability and team to make winning second nature, the reliability of the car is also outstanding :cool:

To say he would be no good in a V8 Supercar is rubbish, the bloke was winning the German equivalent before he stepped up to F1, Frentzen was his teammate back in those days and where is he now :D

[VX2VESS]

he good. to be good you need two things. a good driver one of the best, and be able to give the right feedback to suit you car and yourself to the engineers.
true the engineers get a lot of data but you still need correct driver input as well.

EG craig lowndes great driver but can't give the right answers to the engineers to set the car up for each track. when with HRT he was fast, damn fast better than skaife. scaife can setup cars but not as good as driving. so when lowndes car was setup by scaife lowndes was faster.one of the reasons he left hrt, they listen only to scaife for setup.

[seldo]

Schuie is THE BEST! Without any shadow of a doubt, he is indisputably the best of all time. He can drive in the wet, the dry, rarely breaks his car, is the master tactician, and to suggest he wouldn't be so good in a V8Supercar - hey, get a grip! He could outdrive our current crop of (very good) V8 drivers with one hand behind his back. If you are suggesting any comparison in the levels of skill required, I'm sorry - you are very naive and need to learn a lot more.
Sad part is though, I hate his racing ethics. He will run people off the road without hesitation, and the sad part is - he is so good, he doesn't need to stoop to that level.
But, the best? -Without question. :driving:

[Mat]

To be able to come out and do the quickest time for the weekend after doing one flying lap just proves how good the man is. For me he is the best driver of all time

[YIIR8]

Mooch asked for peoples thoughts, that is exactly what he got....my thoughts. Just because I didn't agree doesn't mean I'm naive mate, do you go around thinking that anyone who's got a differing opinion is naive ??
Maybe the post should of read: thoughts here ONLY is you think Schu is the best !!! no naive posts required. :lol: :lol:


Schuie is THE BEST! Without any shadow of a doubt, he is indisputably the best of all time. He can drive in the wet, the dry, rarely breaks his car, is the master tactician, and to suggest he wouldn't be so good in a V8Supercar - hey, get a grip! He could outdrive our current crop of (very good) V8 drivers with one hand behind his back. If you are suggesting any comparison in the levels of skill required, I'm sorry - you are very naive and need to learn a lot more.
Sad part is though, I hate his racing ethics. He will run people off the road without hesitation, and the sad part is - he is so good, he doesn't need to stoop to that level.
But, the best? -Without question. :driving:

[YIIR8]

YIIR8: It's not fair to point the bone at The Mooch he titled the tread about F1 & Schumacher, you're the bloke that mentioned V8 supercars..... :bash: :p

Like I said.......trying to compare apples and oranges......or.......chickens and turkeys.

[HOWQUICK]

I will chuck my hat in the ring here and agree with those that say he is the best ever....by a very long shot.

V8 SuperCars? There isn't a driver near the joint that could blow wind up the first 10 place getters in F1. Let's face it....V8Sc is only a second rate racing class that is loved by us Aussies- they are our heros and our brands. F1 and the likes are th3e best in the world. Period! ;)

[cheffy]

I think at the moment Schui/ferrari is the best car/driver combo.as for the best ever? In earlier days of f1 the driver would have to shift within 100rpm of blowing the engine.. And use a clutch and soforth. I think Senna would probably be a better driver but schumaker has a great engineer in John Todt and thats what makes him great. Its the communication between a driver and his/her engineer that wins races and sets lap records. Marcos and the stone brothers for in stance have a great understanding of each other. Ive driven for guys that don't listen to my car setup advice and we've lost but other people that listen to me and engineer my car for me(not for Them ) and we win races. I personally always liked Alain Prost.

anyway just my 2c

[spank]

i think that schuey is the greatest of HIS time .its true he has almost broken every record but in a different era of the sport ,just as i think senna was the greatest of his .the cars are changing so much , look at what guys like brabham , fangio , moss and nuvolari had to drive compared with todays cars computer power and aero kits and also tyre technology , but take nothing away from shcuey he his truly a champion .

[the mooch]

Mooch asked for peoples thoughts, that is exactly what he got....my thoughts. Just because I didn't agree doesn't mean I'm naive mate, do you go around thinking that anyone who's got a differing opinion is naive ??
Maybe the post should of read: thoughts here ONLY is you think Schu is the best !!! no naive posts required. :lol: :lol:
The fact that not everyone thinks The Schu is the greatest driver of all makes me wonder just how many of us enthusiasts/idiots stay up on a sunday night to ridiculous hours of the morning, just to watch a bunch of overpaid robotic, characterless blokes race around in the most expensive machinery imaginable. All the while we try to stay awake listening to James Allen talk up the ONLY passing manouvuer of the last 30 laps. Invariably we fall asleep, only to wake up to a driver press conference, explaining said passing manouvuer. Or worse, we've woken up to highlights of the NRL from 2 weeks ago (thats what we get in Adel). I guess I'm not the only person who can appreciate the pinnacle of motorsport as a mecca of speed and power; as there seems to be quite a few who take more than a passing interest, hence the varied opinions. I just hope the FIA fast forward the rule changes due to take affect in 2008 a lot sooner. Then maybe we'll have a more definitive answer to the question that started this all.............. :driving:

[seldo]

Mooch asked for peoples thoughts, that is exactly what he got....my thoughts. Just because I didn't agree doesn't mean I'm naive mate, do you go around thinking that anyone who's got a differing opinion is naive ??
Maybe the post should of read: thoughts here ONLY is you think Schu is the best !!! no naive posts required. :lol: :lol:
YIIR8 - I am sorry if I offended you by my choice of words, but I don't back away from what i said. Would you prefer i beat around the issue and call it "inexperienced" or "keen amateur" or something similar? Comparison between the skill levels required between V8Supercars and F1 is like Grade 6 to Year 12, and I am quite sure that despite some very lofty egos in our current crop of exceptionally good V8 drivers, there would not be a single one of them who would be brash enough to claim they had the skill to even qualify to get on the grid driving an F1 car.
As one of the other posters noted: Who else could do 1 warm-up lap and then set pole on his second and only other lap? Only Schuie...
And I welcome other opinions. If you said Raikinan was better, I'd disagree but i wouldn't call you naive, because he's pretty damn good too, as is Barrichello, and Webber and Button and Trulli and Alonso etc. They are all valid comparisons, but V8 Supercar drivers...Nah. :burnout: :driving: :cheers:

[YIIR8]

YIIR8 - I am sorry if I offended you by my choice of words, but I don't back away from what i said. Would you prefer i beat around the issue and call it "inexperienced" or "keen amateur" or something similar? Comparison between the skill levels required between V8Supercars and F1 is like Grade 6 to Year 12, and I am quite sure that despite some very lofty egos in our current crop of exceptionally good V8 drivers, there would not be a single one of them who would be brash enough to claim they had the skill to even qualify to get on the grid driving an F1 car.
As one of the other posters noted: Who else could do 1 warm-up lap and then set pole on his second and only other lap? Only Schuie...
And I welcome other opinions. If you said Raikinan was better, I'd disagree but i wouldn't call you naive, because he's pretty damn good too, as is Barrichello, and Webber and Button and Trulli and Alonso etc. They are all valid comparisons, but V8 Supercar drivers...Nah. :burnout: :driving: :cheers:

Seldo,
It appears that you've gone off on a tangent and have misunderstood what I was talking about comparing chickens to turkeys.....I was referring about the car set-ups being so much different, it would of been interesting to also see how he would of went in the cars of yesteryear was also mentioned, not high tech and the support these fellas receive inline whilst racing has NASA scratching their heads.

PS: Most grade 6'ers could spell better "back then" than any grade 12's nowadays......food for thought.

[Old Kiwi]

Yes, Shcuey is the greatest so far.....
I think we live in a great era, with Schuey in F1 and Rossi in MotoGP - Rossi is the best ever on 2 wheels without a doubt.




V8 SuperCars? There isn't a driver near the joint that could blow wind up the first 10 place getters in F1. Let's face it....V8Sc is only a second rate racing class

I wouldnt go as far as saying that, Schuey wasnt that great until he hit F1 (sound weird but true) he has just nutted out how to make the F1 go real fast. Scott Dixon will probably fill a Williams seat next year, but Simon Wills used to beat him :eek: Hard to compare the 2 now but :confused:

[cheffy]

Don't forget though what a little thing called money has on a drivers career..... :bash:

[seldo]

Seldo,
It appears that you've gone off on a tangent and have misunderstood what I was talking about comparing chickens to turkeys.....I was referring about the car set-ups being so much different, it would of been interesting to also see how he would of went in the cars of yesteryear was also mentioned, not high tech and the support these fellas receive inline whilst racing has NASA scratching their heads.

PS: Most grade 6'ers could spell better "back then" than any grade 12's nowadays......food for thought.
Can't argue with any of that. None the less, I'd still back him against any of them. the man just has raw talent. :cheers:

[mgygto]

give us a break....you cannot possibly compare the drivers in different eras and state that Shu is the best. I love Shu and he and his team are the best of this generation, it is impossible to say whether he would or would not beat Senna at his best as the cars ( launch control, traction control etc) and a fair number of the tracks are different. Throw Fangio into the mix and you have 3 drivers who have been acknowledged to be at the top of the field in the era that they drove in but to pick one over the other is plain silly.

[seldo]

give us a break....you cannot possibly compare the drivers in different eras and state that Shu is the best. I love Shu and he and his team are the best of this generation, it is impossible to say whether he would or would not beat Senna at his best as the cars ( launch control, traction control etc) and a fair number of the tracks are different. Throw Fangio into the mix and you have 3 drivers who have been acknowledged to be at the top of the field in the era that they drove in but to pick one over the other is plain silly.

Yes, I agree to a certain extent. It's a huge call. But that was the question asked..
And having been around long enough to have watched Moss, Brabham, Villenuve Snr, Mansell, Hill, Senna etc, race live, (just to name a few), I do believe that Shu is the best. I know it's a big call, but when you consider his statistics - poles, lap records, wins, championships, wet/dry skills, least crashes, least spins, reliability, etc etc, I do think it is a valid assessment. I always reckon , in any class of racing, wet weather sorts out the men from the boys, and Shuie is just about invincible in the wet. Sure, current technology is off the planet, but I would still back Shu. I don't like the man one little bit - I think he's an arrogant and ruthless prick who runs people off the road without even blinking, but sh*t he's bloody good....Dammit! :D

[mgygto]

I respect your opinion, at the end of the day it makes for a great discussion over a beer and memories being what they are most people will go for those individuals that have had the greatest exposure and visibility in their own generation. The problem that Shu has in being compared is that there is very very little "racing" in F1 today compared to previous generations (look at the tapes of the 88, 89, 90 seasons - awesome) and again it makes comparisions difficult - statistics in reality cannot be used to judge this ... take a lap time today compared to 50 years ago or if you look at the win % then Shu drops down the order etc etc. So for those of you who believe Shu is the best of all time - good on you! for those of you who believe Senna was the best of all time - good on you! for those of you who believe Fangio was the best of all time - good on you! Winners all.

[300KWCV8]

Schu plays the field so much, Melbourne second practice lap broke the lap record after everyone else had been out for 15 minutes, and seconds faster than the nearest rival, astounding.

He has the best equipment, best personnel and the best manufacturers support - BUT he wouldn't have all this if he wasn't the best driver with the best feedback and pure professional qualities.

Nobody will know for sure because we can never get all these drivers (obvious reasons) in the same car on the same track and test them, but if records/statisitics are to be recognised than he is, and will be for a long time I feel, the best driver in the world.

[The Warden]

[QUOTE=300KWCV8
Nobody will know for sure because we can never get all these drivers (obvious reasons) in the same car on the same track and test them, but if records/statisitics are to be recognised than he is, and will be for a long time I feel, the best driver in the world.[/QUOTE]


Exactly right, how to you measure any sportman against all others? Records, etc... Sch is the best....

Seldo's post is good too, and having seen a few eras with different drivers I respect his opinion. (and of course, it is only an opinion...)

How do Aussies measure Don Bradman for example? Best at this, most of that, etc.... and rightly so, he's the best!

Edit: Of course once a person has icon status, they can pretty much do as they choose.... like Princess Di for example.

Cheers
Gordie

[mgygto]

Schu plays the field so much, Melbourne second practice lap broke the lap record after everyone else had been out for 15 minutes, and seconds faster than the nearest rival, astounding.

but if records/statisitics are to be recognised than he is, and will be for a long time I feel, the best driver in the world.

you see thats part of my point - if you use statistics / records then shu only has the 5th best win / starts ratio:

1 Wallard, Lee 50,000%
2 Fangio, Juan Manuel 47,059%
3 Ascari, Alberto 40,625%
4 Vukovich, Bill 40,000%
5 Schumacher, Michael 37,879%
6 Clark, Jim 34,722%
7 Stewart, Jackie 27,273%
8 Prost, Alain 25,758%
9 Senna, Ayrton 25,466%
10 Moss, Stirling 24,242%

For 200 GP starts he has won 37% of them with a team and a car that are probably the most dominant combination in history, yet he is 5th.
So again there is no single method to judge and no single answer - all we have are opinions.

[seldo]

you see thats part of my point - if you use statistics / records then shu only has the 5th best win / starts ratio:

1 Wallard, Lee 50,000%
2 Fangio, Juan Manuel 47,059%
3 Ascari, Alberto 40,625%
4 Vukovich, Bill 40,000%
5 Schumacher, Michael 37,879%
6 Clark, Jim 34,722%
7 Stewart, Jackie 27,273%
8 Prost, Alain 25,758%
9 Senna, Ayrton 25,466%
10 Moss, Stirling 24,242%

For 200 GP starts he has won 37% of them with a team and a car that are probably the most dominant combination in history, yet he is 5th.
So again there is no single method to judge and no single answer - all we have are opinions.

Ahh - Statistics...:bow: But with respect, although i know my motorsport fairly well, who the hell is Lee Wallard?? A Nascar driver maybe? I've heard of Bill Vukovich, but I sure as hell wouldn't rank him with any of the others on the list. And if it's a start/win ratio, it could mean that Lee Wallard has had 10 starts for 5 wins in the Howdee Doodee 500 or something. You can do wonderful things when you start shoving statistics around and giving them a little fine tuning.( MAFless maybe?? ) But certainly, in terms of the modrn era, Schu is without peer IMHO. Maybe someone might front up with a fresh set of stats in a couple of years. But, my money's on the table now.. :cheers:

[mgygto]

Seldo, obviously you do not know your F1 well enough...all the drivers are F1 drivers, all the stats are the official F1 stats. as I said in my earlier posts statistics can be made you say anything thats why they can never be the single measure and thats why we are left with opinions as well as stats. There is no doubt that Shu is easily the best of the current drivers, the questions was in relation to the past and present.

[seldo]

Seldo, obviously you do not know your F1 well enough...all the drivers are F1 drivers, all the stats are the official F1 stats. as I said in my earlier posts statistics can be made you say anything thats why they can never be the single measure and thats why we are left with opinions as well as stats. There is no doubt that Shu is easily the best of the current drivers, the questions was in relation to the past and present.
Is that right? Never heard of him! What and when did Lee Wallard drive? And i thought Bill Vukovich was a Nascar and Indy driver...It's been too long...Gimme another :beer:

[The Warden]

Just did a "google" on Mr Wallard.

Fair go mgygto, the bloke had two, that's right TWO, GP starts for one win and good on him, but apart from your point about statistics, he's not REALLY in the hunt now is he..... ;)

Look here: Lee Wallard (http://www.f1-stats.de/en/drivers/details.php?d=721)

Cheers,
Gordie

[The Warden]

Bit more "googling" and found this site, it has stats up to Imola '04 by the look (showing Schu @199 starts), read them and weep..... he is the man:

F! stats (http://www.statsf1.com/default.asp?From=/cars/record.asp?idConstructeur=37%26n=171%26LG=1) Click on the GB flag for English, go to Statistics > Drivers...

Here's a few, generally I've put second placegetter in brackets:

World Championship titles = 6 (5 for JMF)
Wins = 75 (51 Prost) ie: half as many again.
Poles = Senna 65 (Schu = 59) only "real stat" he doesn't YET have.
Fastest Laps = 60 (41 Prost)
Points = 1088 (798 Prost)
Podiums = 127 (106 Prost)
Laps lead = 4227 (2931 Senna)
Starts = Riccardo Patrese 256 (Schu = 199) Could still get this one.
Pole + Win = 33 (29 Senna)

And the most telling one,
Retirements = Schu is not even on the list!!!

I must say I did not realise his total domination of F1 until looking these up. Regardless of our opinions, history is going to judge him the best of all time.... for quite a while into the future at least.....

Cheers,
Gordie

[mgygto]

You see all of these posts just re-inforce the point that you can not trust the stats to make the judgement on who was the best "driver". Shu has built up an incredible record on the stats list BECAUSE he has raced in so many GPs which makes Fangios record even more impressive. All of the stats reading "MOST" are quite meaningless because of the amount of time he was in the game compared to others - it is why the stat for Wallard is so misleading also because he raced in a couple only. Calling Shu the best because he holds the largest number of laps led, podiums etc is like calling Tony Lockett the best rules player ever coz he kicked the most goals or Fittler the best league player etc etc etc.

[The Warden]

You see all of these posts just re-inforce the point that you can not trust the stats to make the judgement on who was the best "driver". Shu has built up an incredible record on the stats list BECAUSE he has raced in so many GPs which makes Fangios record even more impressive. All of the stats reading "MOST" are quite meaningless because of the amount of time he was in the game compared to others - it is why the stat for Wallard is so misleading also because he raced in a couple only. Calling Shu the best because he holds the largest number of laps led, podiums etc is like calling Tony Lockett the best rules player ever coz he kicked the most goals or Fittler the best league player etc etc etc.

I do agree with what you are saying regarding stats, etc... and I guess for us fans the topic will rage on for ever. As you say, very hard to compare due to all the differing circumstances etc....

I'm sure this applies to most things, people with an interest will have reasons for their opinion, but what about the man in the street, what will he use to determine his opinion? And why to we give Fangio the benefit of the doubt, given that we didn't see him race to arrive at our respect for the man (well, I presume you didn't see him race :hide: hehehe)

As I said earlier I'm not a great Schu fan, in fact I wait up watching TV 'til 2.00am monday mornings hoping like hell some bugger will get up and beat him, doesn't happen much recently.....

Anyway mgygto, who's your man? - I'm interested in your opinion, not having a go.

Cheers,
Gordie.

[mgygto]

I loved watching Senna, always thought he was "the man" , I respect Fangios record but in reality for me I would love to see Senna racing Shu at their peak ( the first few years they raced Shu was pretty green) . So my vote is a bit of fence sitting which is for Senna and Shu. For the drivers in the past 10 years then Shu & ferrari are definately the ones.

Interesting side thought: Lowndes in SBR , Ambrose in FPR ... who wins?

[seldo]

Thanks for stats Warden. Is Shu the real deal or what? And Mgygto, I suspect you are just tossing in a red herring with Vukovitch and Wallard. Both won at Indy in Kurtis-Offys. What do expect? And that was back when the Yanks pretended Indy was a real GP.
What the stats don't show is how good Shu really is. Just think back - when was the last time he had a crash - or a spin even. Yeah, I know he's had a few, but compared to all the others, bugger all. There was the one at Silverstone where the throttle jammed and he broke his leg, and when he hit Coulthard up the clacker in the rain, but not too many others come to mind. I just hate his "ethics" though. Like at, I think it was the Hungarian GP, a couple of years ago when he had a touch at the first corner and was forced into a spin on the grass, so he drove back onto the track and parked across the corner so they had to stop the race for a restart, (and because it happened in the first 2 laps he gets to use his spare car). And taking out Hill at the AGP to ensure a title win, and taking out Maakinen ditto. He's just an arrogant, ruthlessly efficient, prick. But jeez he can drive. And I suspect that in another couple of years there will not be any argument, no matter how you skew the stats. Sure he's got the best gear, but I really don't think it would make that much difference. it just makes it easier for him. He hasn't always had the best stuff. Barrichello is no slouch and has the same ride - and Schu just drives out of sight. I just wish someone else would come along and spank his arse. :whip:

[SSbaby]

As far as records stand, the stats will say Schumacher is the best. But in a sport where only one driver stands out, he hasn't really had much competition.

I don't know much about Fangio, other than to say many regard him as the greatest ever. In his era, probably very similar to how Schumacher is dominating today.

But in my time, and my opinion only, I have yet to see anyone come within a bee's diaphragm of Senna for sheer balls out bravado and skill.

Perhaps, if Schuey had more pressure applied to him, he would be forced into making more errors but I can't see anyone beating his record for a long, long time.

[the mooch]

I loved watching Senna, always thought he was "the man" , I respect Fangios record but in reality for me I would love to see Senna racing Shu at their peak ( the first few years they raced Shu was pretty green) . So my vote is a bit of fence sitting which is for Senna and Shu. For the drivers in the past 10 years then Shu & ferrari are definately the ones.

Interesting side thought: Lowndes in SBR , Ambrose in FPR ... who wins?
That would be a great scrap, Senna and the Schu... How about throwing Giles Villenueve in the mix. He may not have one a world championship, but considering the buckets of shit he was forced to drive he could of put a Minardi on the front row at Imola '04! That guy really knew how to drive. An article I read in Motor Mag a while back on the anniversary of his death told some interesting tales of the man. I'll have to look for it now.
As for Lowndes at SBR, Ambrose at FPR, more to the point who cares???

[seldo]

That would be a great scrap, Senna and the Schu... How about throwing Giles Villenueve in the mix. He may not have one a world championship, but considering the buckets of shit he was forced to drive he could of put a Minardi on the front row at Imola '04! That guy really knew how to drive. An article I read in Motor Mag a while back on the anniversary of his death told some interesting tales of the man. I'll have to look for it now...

Villenueve Snr sure was a legend and as you say, could have driven a dunny-cart competitively. As I stated in a previous post, I always think that the level of a driver's real skill shows in their wet-weather ability. Villenueve was just unbeatable in the wet (as is Shu). As a little aside, many years ago Colin Bond had a one-off drive in an old uncompetitive Formula 5000 at the late and great Warwick Farm track in Sydney. His first time out in the car ever, in pissing rain, and he put it either on pole or the front row, I forget which. All the regular legends, including plenty of internationals, I seem to remember, were astounded and a bit miffed. Race day of course was fine and sunny and Bondy finished further back than no-where, but he sure put the cat amongst the pigeons. Like I say, the rain is a great leveler of machinery, and sorts out the men from the boys. :cheers: :burnout: :driving:

[VRIIClubby]

Didnt Schuey compete against Senna in his early years? Ran him of the track or sumthing if my memory serves me correctly (I was VERY young) but kinda remember them saying that this young guy could be the one to take senna on and beat him...

[RoadScraper]

No, of the drivers i have seen Senna still takes the mantle as best ever, 88 in the Mac 1.8 seconds in front of Prost at Monaco in qualifying in his first season as a Mac driver.

First test ever in F1 Senna with Williams at Donnington Park, having never driven an F1 car before he proceeded to brake the lap record by over a second and pulled in after 22 laps saying there was no more speed in the car. 3rd test ever in F1, Senna goes 1.3 secs faster on the qualifying tyre than either Mac driver had done all season(Lauda & Prost..I think)

The only true comparison can be between teamates, Senna has beaten...Ellio DeAngelis, Mika Hakkinen(2 x wdc), Gerhard Berger, Alain Prost(4 x wdc), Damon Hill(1 x wdc). Michael has beaten Johnny Herbert, Jos Verstappen, Eddie Irvine and Ruebens none of which have more than a handful of races win to their credit. Plus the whole #1 status at Ferrari and the not having to race his teamates at all really

The only season in which Senna and Michael have driven in anyway comparative Machinery is when both where running Cosworth powered Cars in 93, Schu had the Bennie with the Works Cosworth. Senna had the Mac with the customer Cossie, Senna won 5 races to Schumi's 1 including arguably the greatest wet weather drive of all time(Donnington 93 Senna 5th to 1st on the opening lap) Senna was the undisputed master in the wet, nobody is on the same page, think Monaco 84, Senna a rookie in the Tolman(ie POS) comes from like 18th to second and is rapidly closing in on the leader Prost before chief steward Jackie Ickx red flagged the race.

I rate Schumi 4th...Senna,Jim Clarke,Fangio,Schumi,Prost,Ascari..

Surprised nobody has mentioned Jim Clarke either, this man drove everything, he would win races in F1, then go win off road rally events the next weekend, then off to sportcars and win there as well.

Special mention also to Gilles, I have only seen video tapes and read about him but he was deserving of far more accolades as a driver. He managed pole in a Ferrari at Monaco in which even Ferrari acknowledged they had about half the downforce of the compable front runners, his teamate languished in 17th, unable to turn effectively...Gilles just slid it around..

Great thread, interesting comments

[mgygto]

Good post RoadScraper , good thoughts :)

[seldo]

Yes, v good post RoadScraper - good unemotional rationale. I still think the Schu is that little bit better, but of course we will never know as there is no definitive way of comparing them. Perhaps in a few years when Schu's achievements are so overwhelmingly superior we will be able to be more definite about it, although you could say that had Senna, G Villeneuve, Clark, etc not met their demise prematurely, maybe their records would be more spectacular. None the less - all of them were/are some of the greatest steerers ever. :cheers:
Dave

[the mooch]

To be fair on the topic of beating your team mates, the only one out of the listed drivers Senna raced that you could say pushed him to the limit was Prost. As good as the other drivers were, they either didn't achieve greatness while Senna was around (Hill, Mika) or didn't achieve much anyway, much the same as Schueys team mates, really. And I woud have rated Giles up there and called it a top 6!

[RoadScraper]

No doubt Schuie is the greatest driver of the last 10 years, however he has been denyed much in the way of real competition for the last few seasons. We where robbed of what would of been some special battles between Michael and Ayrton in the years to follow.

Would of been one of THE duels...

[the mooch]

Most definitely, yes. We've all been robbed.......of lost nights watching Schuey cane the opposition. How memorable would the last ten years of racing been if not for the tragic.
One more thing I will (personally) rate a driver on is the ability to stay alive while racing. It's no good saying so and so is the greatest driver if he made the ultimate mistake. Sad but true, I feel. That's why I wouldn't rate any of those guys who lost their lives while racing F1 as the greatest driver. I know I mentioned Giles, and as amazing behind the wheel as he was, he too could never be regarded as the greatest. IMO

[SS Enforcer]

Schuey is good ... very good but I believe that Fangio was probably better IMHO.

See Fangio won nearly 50% of the f1 races he contested , a record not yet equalled by anyone..

When I have more time I will get the exact stats on schumaker and fangio for comparison.

cheers

[RoadScraper]

Drivers make mistakes all the time, look at the most recent Monaco GP, if it had been Schumi in the crash on Sato's blown engine smoke and (God forbid) he had been killed would you then nolonger rate Schumi as a driver?. Of course not.

Most accidents that result in the death of the driver are freakish, and are in no way a reflection of the driver's ability. Look at Gilles accident, he was trying to pass a car and the backmarker moved in the wrong direction at the wrong time, or even Ronnie Peterson, still considered one of the all time greats, but died after 3 days in hosipatal from burns he recvd in a first crn pile up he a about 8 other cars where involved in or of course Senna.

The fact you consider the death of these drivers as a mistake which in someway denegrates their acheivements is somewhat silly in my eyes, if that was the case you could say the same about Michael's 99 Silverstone crash where he broke his leg.

F1 racing recently ran an article of their 100 all time greats, Senna was rated #1, folowed by Fangio, Schumi and Clarke. This list was compiled by current and past team owners, engineers, drivers and F1 media and there comments where clear in who they beleived the #1 to be. F1 racing did the very same article back in 97, and Senna was still rated #1 at that time, so even after Schumi has won 5 titles and broken nearly every record he still couldn't take the top spots away from Ayrton or Fangio in the eyes of the F1 paddock

[seldo]

RoadScraper: Unless there was some way of separating "mistake accidents" from "mechanical failure accients" this is true. But if you could accurately decide which accidents were the reult of a driver error, it would certainly be a valid criteria. Look at Schu at Monaco - i would blame him for his own accident when taken out in the tunnel behind the safety car. He obviously blames Montoya, but he would wouldn't he? I also think that one of the things that separates the great from the just good, is their ability to tip-toe along or even cross the point of no return and get away with it rather than have it defined by a spin or an accident. Certainly, Schu, Senna, Clarke etc to name a few were able to do that and is probably evidenced by their very low spin or accident score. You don't have to be that good to just keep stretching the envelope until you fall off the island - just lucky enough to keep getting away with it.
Your reference to F1 Racing is interesting and is a pretty good and informed assessment, and I guess most who know what they are talking about would have all the same names with just a variation on the order of them. It's very hard to try to rank them when they are all from different eras, because the technology advancement means they all required very different skills. Fangio et al had to cope with speeds and therefore reaction times that would be dramatically exceeded by today's V8SC drivers, and yet hadn't heard of things like launch-control and down-force and adjustable roll-bars and so on. So, it's really a totally un-provable argument because all the variables are so vastly different. I guess it comes down to opinions only. But all very stimulating stuff. :cheers:

[mgygto]

One more thing I will (personally) rate a driver on is the ability to stay alive while racing. It's no good saying so and so is the greatest driver if he made the ultimate mistake. Sad but true, I feel. That's why I wouldn't rate any of those guys who lost their lives while racing F1 as the greatest driver. IMO
What an insane comment. Do you even know how the reason why Senna died? What an absolutely insane comment.

[HOWQUICK]

What an insane comment. Do you even know how the reason why Senna died? What an absolutely insane comment.

VERY VERY good response to a very very nieve post. Discovery Channel's Sismic Seconds was one of the best analysis of a race car mishap I have ever seen. Senna did the right things- the data logger shows... just in the wrong place at the wrong time. :(

[the mooch]

The comments I made regarding drivers staying alive was by no means made to downgrade their status as the worlds best. My point was that if two drivers are held in the same regard for their talents, and one loses his life racing while the other goes on to bigger and better things, then who is the better driver? The fact remains if you are not around to improve on your record, how can you begin to presume how good he was compared to the rest? I base this on an article I read years ago (before Schuey had the record he has now) which asked the same question of who was/is the greatest driver. The writer of the article stated the same thing about drivers dying while racing. At first I didn't agree but I thought about it for a while and began to understand what the writer was saying. Regardless of how the accidents ocurred or who was to blame, you are selling the other drivers short if you put them behind a driver who's career was cut short. This argument works both ways, mind you. Senna and Jim Clarke are prime examples. If both of these great divers saw out their whole careers, would either have a better record than Schumacher? Yes, no, maybe? the first person to answer that with proof will get my support on their findings unquestioned. Lets face it. If Senna went on to win six world titles and 60 or so GP's I would agree he was by far the greatest, even though with that record it still doesn't match Michaels. I remember watching Senna race. He was awesome, and utouchable in the wet. But he made mistakes, too. He was blindingly quick on one or two laps, but Prost more consistent. He knew how to nurse a car home for a result better than Senna ever was. Call it mechaincal sypathy in an era when F1 cars were as fragile as egg shells. Remember, in '88 Senna actually scored less points for the world title than his teammate, but still won it? Hardly rewarding the best driver of the season. I know you can only race to the rules that are set before you. But I like many others I feel Aain Prost was robbed of a world title that year. Just coincidence that the FIA changed the rules not long after that? If you convert that year as a world title for Prost, all of a sudden Sennas record falls into a category with a lot of other drivers who have won 2 titles. Am I speculating on what might have been? Sure, but then so is everyone else that thinks Senna, or any other driver whose career was cut short, was the Greatest. IMO.

[RoadScraper]

For Prosts 89 Championship, or for Schumi's 94 Championship....The 88 WDC was dominated on pace by Senna, with unreliabilty from Senna's Honda engine gifting a number of wins to Prost, this kept the title race close.

I don't think stats are the be all and end all of rating drivers, if this was the case great drivers like Stirling Moss, Gilles Villeneuve and Jean Alesi wouldn't rate in the top 50, when clearly their ability puts them right up there.

I rate on ability, whether a driver is killed while racing doesn't diminsh their ability so I still don't see your side of the equation.

[CALDIR]

Hi

I am a dedicated Ferrari F1 fan. I dislike Michael Schumacher though. I would have to say that MS is the best driver of his time and I would have to give him credit for that. When Senna was around breaking records cars were harder to drive and his opposition was very good, and I mean VERY GOOD for these reasons I beleive Senna was the greatest driver of all time.

Michael Schumacher and Ferrari really do not have any established driver/team combos directly threatening their leadership at the moment so Michael is way out in front.

regards,

Richard
CLUBF1!

[plonkerchops]

I know Im going off on a tangent here with this but with all this comparison between different drivers of different classes of racing ( even NASCAR got a brief mention) Im amazed that World Rally drivers havent yet got a mention
Im not talking the ilk of that Scottish sourpus Colin McRae but the drivers of
the Group B competition in the 80's .Whose heard of Walter Rohrl? Twice World champion The bloke drove one of the 600hp 4wd Audis ( plus other cars in his career) ....basically a spaceframe with kevlar panels with the performance of an F1 car...
Juha Kankkunen? 4 times world rally champion and also a past Group b driver before they banned the class.
These cars were basically F1 rally cars .One of the stories of these cars involved a Lancia Delta which was driven around the Portugese Grand prix track and would have qualified 6th again proper F1 cars ..
Whilst F1 is the pinnicle of racing methinks that drivers like these ( yeah I know I only named 2 ) are real drivers , no electronic gimmericky here ..............

[the mooch]

I rate on ability, whether a driver is killed while racing doesn't diminsh their ability so I still don't see your side of the equation.
My piont is that to be the greatest F1 driver you need to be the total package, not just extremely fast in anything on four wheels, which I presume you meanability. In the same time Prost and Senna raced against each other Senna won three world titles, Prost four. Senna had more poles, Prost had more wins. Prost had a better overall frame of mind for racing an F1 car. He knew when to go faster than everyone, when to take it easy, when to pit at the most opportune time, and how to save his machine. Admittedly, he wasn't the quickest. But thats my point, he was the total package, hence the nickname, the Professor. Now if you can't put Prost ahead of Senna (and I never said you should) then how can you proclaim Senna as the greatest?
The drivers championship rewards a driver for his performance during an F1 championship. It uses a set of rules that everyone races to. Ultimately it decides who is the best driver in an F1 season. Critics can argue how fair or unfair it is, but at the end of the day you play by the FIA rules or you go home. So all we really have at the end of the day are stats that are brought about in part by these rules. And, in my humble opinion, not anyone elses, believe that Schumacher is the greatest driver of all time. All the arguments of "but back in the early days there was no traction control, no computers, no blah, blah, blah"; back in the early days they didn't pull 4.5g through a corner, they didn't accelerate in a way that disfigured your internal organs either. We don't have tools that allow us to judge a drivers performance of a bygone era with one now. I'm not basing my opinion solely on stats alone. Hell no. But when you have an overwhelming amount of them stacked in your favour, it's pretty hard to argue against it.

[seldo]

Good post Mooch. It's a pretty fair argument that the measure of success is how they go within the FIA rules. Although, it's also interesting to look at Brabham in this regard. His declared strategy to win titles was to win at the slowest speed possible, and whilst obviously a very good steerer with 3 titles, no one has ever put his hand up as one of the all time greats and he was successful through consistency, mechanical empathy in an era of renowned mechanical fragility, and of course a fair dollop of skill as well. But while he fulfilled the FIA criteria of world champion 3 times, I don't see anyone here pushing his barrow..
By the way, Schu didn't do his meagre reputation any harm last night in Germany with yet another pole, fastest lap, consistently 3 seconds a lap quicker than the rest of the field (3 seconds a lap!!!!!!!), lap record and another win. How good is this bloke...? Like I have said in earlier posts, the longer he goes on, the more irrefutable will be his undisputed title of best ever. Pity he's such a prick.

[the mooch]

Thanks Seldo. I'm glad someone out there understands where I'm coming from. Good point about Sir Jack, too. There are a few drivers who fall into the same category. Niki Luada came back from the most of horrific of accidents, of which he still bears shocking scars, to win his third world title. Look, I don't won't to harp on about the issue but please read the following exerpt from Motor Magazine Oct. 2002. It is the F1 wrap written by Mike Doodson, who if you haven't heard of, has been reporting on F1 for over 35 years. It goes as follows:
"Ayrton Senna was unquestionably a follower of Fangio, whom he met several times and revered. He, too, was expected to win (Senna), and he had won 2 championships, with more to come, when he was killed at the age of 34; one year older than Schumacher is now. When asked to rate Senna, I always put him behind Fangio because I believe that staying alive is part of a champions talent."

Doodson then goes on to compare Schumacher with Fangio, their good and bad points, like Schueys two unforgivable crashes that decided world championships; and Fangio's ruthlessness at calling in his teammates into the pits, only to take over their drive! Kind of like Brocky did at Bathurst '87. Ultimately he leaves his column open so the reader can make up his own mind.
I'm not trying to push Doodsons views onto anyone, nor do I agree with them entirely. But he did have a point, one that I can see. And I do appreciate his knowledge of F1, him being a part of it for so long. I hope this clears a few things up. The Mooch

[C4B]

I know Im going off on a tangent here with this but with all this comparison between different drivers of different classes of racing ( even NASCAR got a brief mention) Im amazed that World Rally drivers havent yet got a mention
Im not talking the ilk of that Scottish sourpus Colin McRae but the drivers of
the Group B competition in the 80's .Whose heard of Walter Rohrl? Twice World champion The bloke drove one of the 600hp 4wd Audis ( plus other cars in his career) ....basically a spaceframe with kevlar panels with the performance of an F1 car...
Juha Kankkunen? 4 times world rally champion and also a past Group b driver before they banned the class.
These cars were basically F1 rally cars .One of the stories of these cars involved a Lancia Delta which was driven around the Portugese Grand prix track and would have qualified 6th again proper F1 cars ..
Whilst F1 is the pinnicle of racing methinks that drivers like these ( yeah I know I only named 2 ) are real drivers , no electronic gimmericky here ..............


I agree completely. Some of the great rally drivers would have to be considered the equal of the great circuit champions.

One of the greatest and certainly most diversely talented drivers of all time would have to be Finnish Rally Legend Ari Vatanen. For those who don't know him ,he's the guy who starred in the Pike's Peak Video driving the monster Peugeot with the big Pioneer wing on the back.

I've seen rally footage of Ari Vatanen that literally takes your breath away, he was just that good a driver. Ironically despite his incredible talent behind the wheel he will never be held in the same regard as any F1 champion, even the least talented ones like Nigel Mansell or Damon Hill.

[seldo]

Some of you blokes have jumped on The Mooch for suggesting that the ability to stay alive in F1 is irrelevant and is not a skill factor. Well I disagree - to an extent...equipment failure can get anyone, so take that out of the equation.
When someone is a natural talent it is so much easier and safer for them to test the point of no return and they rarely have accidents or spins viz Shu.
There was a bloke here in OZ many years ago called Warwick Brown. He was amazingly quick in our premier open-wheel categories and progressed up through F2 and then F5000 - until he had the BIG one which had been coming for ages with his name written large all over it. You see, Brown really had no fear, and that's dangerous in itself because it helps keep you alive, helps tell you when you are going too fast, braking too late. He also wasn't what I would call a natural driver - he just drove round corners faster and faster, braked later and later, until he fell off the island and spun or hit something, and then he backed it off one notch. I reckon in an average season he'd have more spins than a Whirlpool Twin-tub! But because he was pretty lucky, he didn't hit much and was very damn quick, he won heaps, but in my eyes it didn't make him a great driver, just fearless, or daring or stupid if you like.
And while I wouldn't assume to put any of the subject drivers in that sort of category, with maybe the exception of Stirling Moss, there is a degree of that in some of them, and that is where Schu is just amazing - he makes it look so simple, so easy. He rarely gets out of shape , rarely spins or crashes and just keeps on winning. In last weekend's German GP he was 3 seconds a lap faster than most of them, which, in a sport timed to the 1000th of a second is just unheard of. I was also interested to compare the driver's-eye camera view of Schu compared to all the others and his steering input is so smooth and minimal compared to all the other guys you'd wonder if they're on the same race track. I reckon he's just a freak. :cheers: Dave

[mgygto]

So Mooch & Seldo by your thinking it doesn't matter really what Schu does from here on in if , God Forbid, he has the ultimate accident he can't be judged the greatest......c'mon guys your kidding!

[RoadScraper]

exerpt from Motor Magazine Oct. 2002. It is the F1 wrap written by Mike Doodson, who if you haven't heard of, has been reporting on F1 for over 35 years. It goes as follows:
"Ayrton Senna was unquestionably a follower of Fangio, whom he met several times and revered. He, too, was expected to win (Senna), and he had won 2 championships, with more to come, when he was killed at the age of 34; one year older than Schumacher is now. When asked to rate Senna, I always put him behind Fangio because I believe that staying alive is part of a champions talent."

If this dude has been following F1 for 35 years he should at least know Senna won 3 WDC's...I mean come on....and he's meant to be an expert, i recall that Motor mag I still have it kicking around, had the VYSS on the cover.

[the mooch]

I never really researched Fangio's life, so I can't tell you when he passed. I can only presume that Doodson was talking about when Senna hed met Juan that he had 2 world championships, with more to come. Either that or it's a typo by the printers (?). As to the answer of whether Scumacher remains in my mind as the greatest driver in history if he were to make the ultimate mistake, I will refer back to earlier posts. That is, all we would have to go by for comparing drivers of different eras are stats....... I guess my answer would then require weighing up Michaels stats at the very end, if he did make the ultimate mistake. Right now he's very much alive and very much wiping the floor (track?) with the other drivers' butts.
Fact. The guy has nothing, nothing to prove in F1. He races purely for the love of it, and he's bloody good at it, too. The monetry rewards probably have very little to do with it. Ferrari Spa will probably pick up his tab for the rest of his life and i'm sure his kids will never go hungry. He has the same inspiration for winning as all the guys in history that have been mentioned earlier, and continues to be the best at the present moment. I'll pay him the respect he has earnt and well and truly deserves, some of todays racers could do well by learning from his approach to F1.

[RoadScraper]

What about the way a driver makes you feel watching them race. I have seen numerous tapes of Gilles, and he just takes my breath away with his commitment and aggression. Neither of those stats appear in any record books, only in the yarns at the pub or amongst mates. Michael has just never given me anything in that respect.

Not everyone sees stats as the only way to measure a driver, imo stats are far to open to manipulation.

(ie)In 88 Mac won nearly every race, Senna dominated the season on pace but Prost's consistency of results over the course of the season kept the title close. Prost ultimately finishing ahead, however with the removal of the worst result Senna took the title. So statically Prost scored more points than Senna in 88, but Senna won the title? This is the perfect example of stats not showing the true result.

I see Michael's stats as manipulated, if he had been racing his teamate flat out on an even keel over the last few years and still scored as many wins and titles as he has then damn sure he would be considered best ever, but the assistance he has received as out and out #1 has meant that he races 1 less car on Sunday than every other driver, and for me that leaves too many questions unanswered.

[the mooch]

What about the way a driver makes you feel watching them race. I have seen numerous tapes of Gilles, and he just takes my breath away with his commitment and aggression. Neither of those stats appear in any record books, only in the yarns at the pub or amongst mates. Michael has just never given me anything in that respect.
.
Fair call, but this is the problem we will always face when comparing drivers of different eras. And thats why I stated in previous posts, all we really have are the drivers stats (records). I loved watching Senna race (quailfying was something to see), too, and I remember the '88 title reasonably well. I also recall Senna driving Prost off the road to win the title. Now I wonder where Michael got the idea from? I also recall that the McLaren MP4/4 was head and shoulders above the competition (much like the Ferrari's have been the last few years, or so it seems). The whole '88 series was a two horse race that went to the final two round to decide it. Schueys last two world titles have not seen Rubino get anywhere near his team mate, regardless of how much supposed extra help Michael gets. It's been said before; the first guy you have to beat in a race is your teammate. and having said that, if Michael weren't around this year Ruebens would be leading the championship, just.

[seldo]

Unfortunately, stats are all we have as a gauge of a drivers's ability. And you are right, the car they are driving can certainly help to win the championship, but that's been the case for since the F1WDC began. There have always been dominant cars and dominant engines and that goes back to when Moss and Fangio and Ascari et al were at it. But, you will also find that generally the cream rises to the top and the best driver ends up driving the best car, if not this year, certainly the next. As far as judging or commenting on these things, we are all absolute mugs compared to the blokes who REALLY know what's going on, who's up who, and who's not paying. The team owners and managers can pick these talents years ahead, and very quickly grab them on the way up. And the drivers do too. They know the standard of the bloke they're rubbing wheels with, and they are very quick to see which car is handling the best, or stopping the best or going the hardest.That's why they go and tug on the team owner's sleeve and say, wink, wink, nudge, nudge - "I'll be out of contract on the 25 Dec this year and I'd love to come and drive for you, because I reckon your car is the car to beat next year." So, the best teams get the best drivers, and each complements the other. If Ferrari is the best car (and i don't think there is any doubt about that at present) surely you don't think that Jean Todt couldn't go and pick the eyes out of the whole driver line-up each year (contracts permitting - and that can be negotiated too). And guess who he has chosen for the last 7 or 8 years? Schu and Rubes. Why? - because he thinks they are nice blokes? Don't think so. In his eyes they are the best and the second best of the current field. I reckon he could be right too..
BTW did you see that Webber was fastest in testing at Silverstone this week? Button 2nd, Rubens 3rd. Not bad.

[GPT]

IMHO Senna was the best in the last 20 years.He raced in a time with drivers of the calibre of Prost,Piquet,Mansell,Rosberg.Secondly the cars were much harder to drive and alot more dangerous.

[CALDIR]

Hi

I would have to agree a little with GPT's comment.

At the moment the F1 races are like a Year 12 student confident with his trusty calculator competing against a bunch of Grade 2 students with new scientific calculators in a maths contest. Once the Grade 2 students shuffle their calculators around till one of them finds one that really suits them the Year 12 student will then threatend. This is what is currently happening in F1. In the 80's their were lots of Year 12 students with trusty calculators.....now their is only one (Michael Schumacher) maximum 2 (Rubens Barichello).

The above are my thoughts only.

regards,

Richard
CLUBVX

[The Warden]

Guys, a bit O/T but if you want a funny easy read about drivers in F1, get a paperback called "Formula One - the hard way" by Perry McCarthy.

Who's Perry McCarthy I hear you ask? Have you ever watched the TV show "Top Gear" ?, and the test driver "The Stig".....that's Perry McCarthy.

It's a bloody funny, laugh out loud book in places, set in F1 / UK motorsport during the mid-late '80's. An example is his story about trying to get sponsorship from Wang Computers, in the end the deal fell through, McCarthy says he was quite happy on reflection, as he could imagine Murray Walker blerting out "and here comes the wang car...." :lol: He talks about Senna and reckons the man was completely fearless...

Cheers,
Gordie

[RoadScraper]

Fearless is right...

In his first test with Williams he was talking to the mechanics about how God would show him the best line and help him acheive the quickest lap time. Which he did comfortably.

Ayrton beleived it was his god given right to race and win, explains alot about him really.

I don't think Ruebens was hired to challenge Michael, he has said himself many times, especially in the wake of the Austria disgrace in 2002, that he signed a contract for Ferrari knowing full well what his role would be with the team. Ruebens is good enough to keep it together and consistently deliver points, but he has never had the outright speed to challenge Michael, and given the events of the last few years his motorvation would be little or nothing atm(ie he knows Ferrari want to win with Michael not him, so why even bother at all)

[the mooch]

Ruebens is good enough to keep it together and consistently deliver points, but he has never had the outright speed to challenge Michael, and given the events of the last few years his motorvation would be little or nothing atm(ie he knows Ferrari want to win with Michael not him, so why even bother at all)
Err, are you kidding? Were you watching the same 1999 world championship as the rest of the world? When Scumacher broke his leg do you think the team just gave up and said "oh, stuff Eddie, we only want to win this W.C with Michael." Thats hardly the attitude to have when running the most high profile motor racing team in the world. They threw everything at Ed and he still didn't deliver (he even had the best no. 2 driver in history helping him :stick: ). I'd say the team sponsors would be asking questions if they found out that they only wanted to win with Michael. Not a very proffessional attitude at all. :stupid:
BTW; 8 differrent winners last year, decided at last round. Hardly boring...........

[seldo]

Fearless is right...

In his first test with Williams he was talking to the mechanics about how God would show him the best line and help him acheive the quickest lap time. Which he did comfortably.

Ayrton beleived it was his god given right to race and win, explains alot about him really.

I don't think Ruebens was hired to challenge Michael, he has said himself many times, especially in the wake of the Austria disgrace in 2002, that he signed a contract for Ferrari knowing full well what his role would be with the team. Ruebens is good enough to keep it together and consistently deliver points, but he has never had the outright speed to challenge Michael, and given the events of the last few years his motorvation would be little or nothing atm(ie he knows Ferrari want to win with Michael not him, so why even bother at all)

Very sadly, the fearless ones often don't make the distance.
Believe me, a healthy respect for your own mortality is a very necessray ingredient for survival, and it is only thing that keeps you from stepping too far over that thin line.
And don't be too hard on Rubens - he has proven on many occassions that he can take it to Schu when the moment requires. I suspect that at present he is playing the dutiful back-up partner, but that is a team-orders thing and has no bearing on his undoubted ability, IMHO he is probably one of the most under-rated of the current crop, simply because he stands in Schu's shadow. Without Schu, he would be THE man and is possibly a bit miffed at having to play second fiddle to Schu and so has lost a bit of enthusiasm for the task at present. imho

[the mooch]

I agree. Rubino probably would be the man if not for Schumachers existance. It's one of the reasons I say Michael is the greatest, for although Ruebens has proven he can show him up, it's occurences a too few and far between. He just seems to lack that killer instinct every time he races. :(

[RoadScraper]

Err, are you kidding? Were you watching the same 1999 world championship as the rest of the world?

I think so, I think you missunderood what I was saying, it is Ferrari's preference to win with Michael, so the ideal straergy, the best mechanics etc etc all work with Michael.

[seldo]

I think so, I think you missunderood what I was saying, it is Ferrari's preference to win with Michael, so the ideal straergy, the best mechanics etc etc all work with Michael.
You seem to have this fixation that it's all some big conspiracy and that Ferrari only want Michael to win. That's just a nonsense. Ferrari couldn't care less if their workshop "gofor" managed to win, just as long as someone does it in their car. Let's face it, they are not in it just for fun, it's a huge business and all they want is results - they couldn't give a rat's who is driving just as long as it's their car and it wins. In some respects they may even prefer that Rubens was the winner as it would reflect better on Ferrari's engineering as being superior, rather than just Schu's ability. They would much rather Ferrari go down in history as being invincible rather than have Schuie take all the glory. Let's be realistic - the object of the exercise is to build the brand's reputation which flows back to selling more road-cars. They really couldn't care 2 bob for Shuie's reputation, and also, if Rubens was able to knock him off, it might save them $30 -$40m in salary for Schuie. They would rather pay Rubens $15m instead of Schuie's salary which is the equivalent of the GDP for many a small country...:shock:

[the mooch]

Technical superiority and winning championships is what Ferrari is all about. They spend $0.00 on marketing their road cars. In fact, they actually forbid their dealerships from advertising other than to inform whats in stock. When is the last time you saw a Ferrari advertising campaign? They only build road cars to fund the racing business. I'd say the ciggie companies pour more money into their racing budget than the road cars do, anyway! Like I said before, those sponsors would be pretty pissed off if the team didn't focus on both drivers. Otherwise, they'd be asking for 1/2 their money back.
As for the obsession with Michael in particular, I think you read into the whole scenario too heavily. Each driver has his own strategy for a race. I guess Michaels strategies are better than his teammates..........most of the time.
O/T I had the pleasure of visiting the Galleria Ferrari in Maranello back in '99, just after Michael broke his leg. He enjoyed just as much support from his team back then as he does now (that is, heaps) as did Eddie Irvine. There was no "Shrine D'Michael" or any other drivers in their racing history present there. I doubt there is now. Just cars, and lots of 'em. Only the machines are glorified. Their drivers all get a mention, but none are worshipped.

[seldo]

[QUOTE=the mooch]...Technical superiority and winning championships is what Ferrari is all about. They spend $0.00 on marketing their road cars. In fact, they actually forbid their dealerships from advertising other than to inform whats in stock. When is the last time you saw a Ferrari advertising campaign? They only build road cars to fund the racing business. I'd say the ciggie companies pour more money into their racing budget than the road cars do, anyway! ...
QUOTE]
You obviously misunderstood or misread what i said.
What I actually said was that the racing team exists as an image builder and to build brand awareness, brand superiority. If you were permitted to look at the books i am sure that the F1 team would be largely self-funded (with an enormous amount of help from its sponsors) and it is there to promote the sale of the road cars. Hey, its just another business. When expendidture exceeds income for too long, it has to fold. Ditto the road cars. Yes, I know that FIAT pump a lot of money in too but, at the end of the day it has to be sustainable, and if they cannot succeed with the various income streams, the result is inevitable.
But, we are OT. Schuie is the best, and there's nothing wrong with Rubens either, but he's not on the short list of all time greats. :driving:

[the mooch]

I understood you Seldo. I have just taken another angle to show how absurd it is to suggest that one driver gets better service than his teammate.
Of course a team will want a particular driver to win more than the other if it is mathematically impossible for the other not win the championship. After all, it's still a team sport. The other driver still needs the best he can get in terms of technical support, otherwise, how can he support the guy with the chance to win? :confused:

[seldo]

I understood you Seldo. I have just taken another angle to show how absurd it is to suggest that one driver gets better service than his teammate.
Of course a team will want a particular driver to win more than the other if it is mathematically impossible for the other not win the championship. After all, it's still a team sport. The other driver still needs the best he can get in terms of technical support, otherwise, how can he support the guy with the chance to win? :confused:
I couldn't agree with you more! Roadscraper seems to think it's all loaded to favour Schuie. I disagree with that and say that, as far as is possible, they have equal resources. :cheers:

[CarlFST60L]

I have near on watched every race since 1996 and he is always one step ahead of everyone... Ervine said it, barchello said it... What more do you want?

[RoadScraper]

I understood you Seldo. I have just taken another angle to show how absurd it is to suggest that one driver gets better service than his teammate.
Of course a team will want a particular driver to win more than the other if it is mathematically impossible for the other not win the championship. After all, it's still a team sport. The other driver still needs the best he can get in terms of technical support, otherwise, how can he support the guy with the chance to win? :confused:

Pfffft

So what was Austria 2001 & 2002, there was no way the championship had been decided by either of these races, so why have Ruebens move over? especially 2002.

Also count how many DNF's Ruebens has had compared to Michael over the last 4 years...not too mention the number of times Ruebens has been screwed in the pit stops, given crap stratergy, crap tyres, Michael gets the new car first the list goes on..

If you don't think Ferrari favour Michael you are sadly sadly mistaken, it aint fixation it's fact, some of MIchael's fans love to suggest that Ruebens has an equal shot when eveyone who lives in reality knows better. Even Frank Williams, a man who never speaks out about other teams and their tactics recently said Ferrari should let Ruebens race Michael.

And Ruebens isn't the only one, Eddie Irvine's book is quite detailed in how he was forced on numerous occasions to "make way" and in some cases block other drivers to help Michael. This was also the case at Bennetton, Johhny Herbert has also mentioned it many times.

[RoadScraper]

Lol my comp crashed so continuing on

Bottom line Michael's #1 position in Ferrari has made F1 boring. Even Ralf said it today, and he has always held his tongue. He has ability, no doubt about it, but his contribution to the sport has been what?

1.Reduced tv ratings
2.Weaker race weekend attendance
3.Boring on track action with pretty well all overtaking being done in the pits
4.Predictable outcomes, even when Ruebens is leading

[HOWQUICK]

Lol my comp crashed so continuing on

Bottom line Michael's #1 position in Ferrari has made F1 boring. Even Ralf said it today, and he has always held his tongue. He has ability, no doubt about it, but his contribution to the sport has been what?

1.Reduced tv ratings
2.Weaker race weekend attendance
3.Boring on track action with pretty well all overtaking being done in the pits


sounds like V8SuperCars.... :D Ever watched Nascar? :confused: what you are talking about is what has happened with professional motorsport in an age where the choice of entertainment far excedes anything else in past eras....

unfortunately you never miss what you have until it is gone. Wonder what the crowd will be like at the last race when he decides to hang up his boots? Team pollitics? Who gives a toss. If Rubens was so great he could walk into any camp and kick but...team isn't so good? Develop it like Micheal did. Iam sure Rubins isn't there for just the money....he would have personal goals aswell you know.

in Micheal you have the opportunity to witness a real talented champion in action....savour it. His talent is rare and you normally only get to see that sort of stuff once in your life. ;) That he is a bit of a bad sport at times only shows he is human and adds to his persona in this age of pollitical correctness I reckon it is great to see some antics. Like James Herd....it is great to see someone say what they think rather than what is expected. The puch up in AFL? Vintage stuff!

What has he added? Plenty in my book.

Go Micheal you good thing!!! :)

[the mooch]

Just watched my recording of the Canadian GP. Missed the first nine laps on the tape. Gotta say, Ruebens had a chance, didn't take it, then blew it on his out lap. Unlike Michael who during Ruebens' pit stop and his own reeled off fastest lap after fastest lap. He didn't make any errors of note, unlike the majority of the opposition. Like the commentators said with 2 laps to go when Ruebens set the fastest lap of the race, "Where was that speed 10 laps ago?" or words to that effect. By that stage any supposed favouring of Michael would have meant no effect on the outcome of his race. Barrichello just doesn't try hard enough. And please don't make excuses of 'his brakes were on the way out.' Michael, as pointed out by the commentary, is heavier on his brakes due to braking through the corners. Michael also never gives up trying to win a place by pressuring the guy ahead of him. Barrichello could have done so to Ralf, but didn't. Not good enough. :(

[LX346]

Couldn't be stuffed reading the last 6 pages of replies so I'll just put my answer to the threads question here if its been said already or not.

I think Schuey is driving the best prep'd (most $$) F1 car there is on the track, although I don't think that makes him the best driver, the car plays the biggest part.

If you go back a few seasons in V8 Supercars when Craig Lowndes was in HRT, HRT had the best prep'd (most $$) cars on the track and Craig was almost unstoppable just like Schuey, put him in another car like what happened when he joined the Ford team and where is he now or better still who is Craig Lowndes now? People don't even mention his name.

Unless all things are equal (car side of things) its hard to judge the best driver.

You can put the worlds best driver in the worlds slowest car, he is never going to win so your never going to know he is the worlds best unless your on a level comparison field.

[the mooch]

I think Schuey is driving the best prep'd (most $$) F1 car there is on the track, although I don't think that makes him the best driver, the car plays the biggest part.


Unless all things are equal (car side of things) its hard to judge the best driver.

You can put the worlds best driver in the worlds slowest car, he is never going to win so your never going to know he is the worlds best unless your on a level comparison field.
Thats a fair call, to an extent. If you use that analogy then we may as well forget about all the results from all the races we've had in history, because at numerous points in time I'm sure the best car has delivered the victory, moreso than the driver. This thread was about getting peoples opinion on whether Michael Schumacher is the greatest racecar driver of all time, not the greatest car. It's plainly obvious that the Ferrari has the edge at the moment. Barrichello's results are testament to that. But if you take a look at Schu's history of racing, you'll see he hasn't always had the best car to race with. Witness his '95 WC; the Williams had the better chassis (engines were identical to the Benettons from memory) and yet he blew Damon Hill and the rest into the weeds. When he moved to Ferrari a year later his critics thought he was nuts because the car he was getting was so poor, yet he still managed to win the odd race with it. Now who's laughing. He built the team around himself, and lifted them to heights not even Enzo himself could imagine. That is pretty special. Even Ayrton Senna couldn't do that. He joined a team that was already on top of it's game and proceeded to deliver the goods; as any great driver should (no roadscraper, I'm not having a dig). At the end of the day the cream will always rise to the top. And so has.......

[Dane]

I like to throw my thoughts in as to 'who' is the greatest driver, trophies may not be on the shelves and the bank account may not have the multi million contracts every year ....... But my vote is for:

GRASSY :D

Cheers ..... :p

[seldo]

Ho Hum! US GP at Indy last night - Schu 1st, Barrichello 2nd, Sato 3rd!!!...Yawn!

[Kirium]

This season WILL go down as the most boring in recent memory..

Bring on 2006 and the new Tech Reg changes...

[the mooch]

Stick Sato in a Williams. At least then he won't have botched race strategies.

[Old Kiwi]

This season WILL go down as the most boring in recent memory..


Dont think so, give it 25 years and Schuey's dominance will be legandary. They'll make many documenty's about these 'boring' seasons ;)

[seldo]

Dont think so, give it 25 years and Schuey's dominance will be legandary. They'll make many documenty's about these 'boring' seasons ;)
I guess you're right. Indy was'nt such a bad race actually. There was a bit of action, some overtaking and out-braking, Rubens had a bit of a go at Schu (and nearly got taken out by him - surprise, surprise), and Sato drove damn well. One of the best races of the season so far I'd reckon. Just that Schu is so damn good...When i said in previous post that it was ho-hum I meant that Schu won yet AGAIN. He just makes it look so easy.

[the mooch]

well the race may have been void of excitment (overtaking) but a four stop strategy? That's gutsy. made Alonso look like he was standing still in the end...........

[C4B]

Couldn't be stuffed reading the last 6 pages of replies so I'll just put my answer to the threads question here if its been said already or not.

I think Schuey is driving the best prep'd (most $$) F1 car there is on the track, although I don't think that makes him the best driver, the car plays the biggest part.

If you go back a few seasons in V8 Supercars when Craig Lowndes was in HRT, HRT had the best prep'd (most $$) cars on the track and Craig was almost unstoppable just like Schuey, put him in another car like what happened when he joined the Ford team and where is he now or better still who is Craig Lowndes now? People don't even mention his name.

Unless all things are equal (car side of things) its hard to judge the best driver.

You can put the worlds best driver in the worlds slowest car, he is never going to win so your never going to know he is the worlds best unless your on a level comparison field.

Don't forget when Schumaker first went to Ferrari, they couldn't have won a V8 supercar race, let a lone an F1 race. Without Schumaker at Ferrari, they wouldn't have the best cars on the track at the moment (A top driver that can provide feedback to his team is important).

Ironically, a couple of other drivers who thought they were top stuff tried doing the same as schumaker did by going to Ferrari and they demonstrated just how limited they were as drivers (car setup). Think of Villineuve and Craig Lowndes. They were both racing for top outfits and changed to new teams and were never heard of again.

[seldo]

British GP - Just lucky i guess...still, 10 from 11 is better than nothing... He'll probably be ok when he gets a bit of experience..

[mgygto]

I watched the full race last night and the tactical pit stop from Ferrari was sensational. Not the time in the pit but the fact that when he was second they left him out when Williams bought their car in. Schu then floored it in clear air and reeled of lap records, the Williams car came out of the stop and ended up in traffic. Ferrari calculated how many laps they needed Schu out in front to be able to pit and come out still in the lead. The Williams car lost around 3- 4 seconds in traffic, Schu pitted, had the same stop time as the Williams had but came out in front. It was awesome, like watching a game of chess. Now THATS teamwork!

[seldo]

I watched the full race last night and the tactical pit stop from Ferrari was sensational. Not the time in the pit but the fact that when he was second they left him out when Williams bought their car in. Schu then floored it in clear air and reeled of lap records, the Williams car came out of the stop and ended up in traffic. Ferrari calculated how many laps they needed Schu out in front to be able to pit and come out still in the lead. The Williams car lost around 3- 4 seconds in traffic, Schu pitted, had the same stop time as the Williams had but came out in front. It was awesome, like watching a game of chess. Now THATS teamwork!
You're not wrong! Yeah, pretty to watch! It's a very slick operation from top to bottom, but no use if the bloke in the car can't take advantage of such tactics and make up the time on the track. Schuie does it again..

[CarlFST60L]

They guy is in another league, a couple of times this year push that car into lap records at the exact moment when he needs to i.e. just like last night and at canada...

All we need is Mark W next to MS :D

[RoadScraper]

Don't forget when Schumaker first went to Ferrari, they couldn't have won a V8 supercar race, let a lone an F1 race. Without Schumaker at Ferrari, they wouldn't have the best cars on the track at the moment (A top driver that can provide feedback to his team is important).

Ironically, a couple of other drivers who thought they were top stuff tried doing the same as schumaker did by going to Ferrari and they demonstrated just how limited they were as drivers (car setup). Think of Villineuve and Craig Lowndes. They were both racing for top outfits and changed to new teams and were never heard of again.

Let's also not forget that when Michael came across from Bennetton, Ferrari acquired both Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn as well. Now Ferrari also have one of the best engine men going around in Martinello and one of the best team managers in Jean Todt. So let's not get to overzealous about the impact Michael has had at Ferrari.

Now I am not saying Michael's impact has not been significant, but when you look at the performance of Bennetton after these guys left in 95 ie title contenders to mid field in 96(with a car Ross and Rory had had a fair hand in) to back of the pack dicing with woeful Jags and even Minardis until what late 2002 when they climbed back up to midfield.

So to suggest that the improvement at Ferrari is solely or even mostly attributed to Michael is going a bit far, an outstanding team effort driven by a number of key personel would be a much fairer assesment.

The comment that Jacque was the reason for the lack of success at BAR is at bit of an exageration as well, check the number of times his car actually finished a race in the 5/6 years he was there compared to Michael at Ferrari, let alone have proven top notch engineers in Ross Brawn and Rory Byrne as well as the biggest budget in F1 at your disposal.

BTW I am struggling to see any sensational aspects of using a 4 stop stratergy to effetively hide from having to overtake another car on track.

Tell me the last time you saw Michael make a legitimate overtaking move on track ie) not a Ruebens move over, I am struggling but I can only think of Montoya at Melb in 2002.

You are right about the doco's in the years to come, I can think of the title now...The Death of F1 racing or maybe How to win an F1 WDC using pit stops, seriously I can't see how some of you guys get entertainment from watching one car win every race unchallenged, and even go to the extent of applauding a stratergy that reduces on track overtaking...is this racing or what?

I would hate to see Webber at Ferrari with Michael, and infact Mark has said he would never go to Ferrari as a #2......why ruin his career to play #2 like Reubens has.