Page 3 of 10
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 4:30 pm
by Julian Mayo
And a getaway car
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:02 pm
by RE30B#16
F1-NUT wrote:Honestly, please love Schumacher as much as you do, but don't fool yourself that the man is not what he is. Just accept it - he will do anything to win! Some peole find that an admirable trait, which is great, but please don't insult our intelligences with this 'It was Damon's fault' argument. I don't think I've ever read anything quite so ridiculas.
[/color]
I can concede that perhaps Schuey did not intentionally try to crash out Damon, but to lay all of the blame at Damon Hill's feet is patently ridiculous.
At the speed he was traveling, MS had to know that Hill, who was catching him by leaps and bounds crash or no crash, was coming up behind fast, so to get on the racing line would merely be an attempt to block if not force a mistake.
I might accept a "just one of those racing deals" argument, but the evidence is clearly tipped against Schumacher.
Chris
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:56 pm
by RE30B#16
F1-NUT wrote:I was a fan of Schuie before the Damon incident. I and many others really liked and supported him. Particularly how he turned arounf the Benetton team and showed himself to be a class above the rest. Someone of Sennaresque talent. Someone, I believe infinitely more talented than Hill. Sure, I was supporting the British guy, Damon in the championship, but up to that point (compounded by the JV incident), I had nothing but respect for Schumie. That respect disappeared and for good reason.[/color]
I mean no disrespect to F1-NUT, but it is interesting how we decide who is supremely talented, and who is not. Damon Hill is a tremendously gifted driver. He was partnered with the best of the best in Ayrton Senna, held his own, and had a better relationship with the great man than he managed to get out of David Coulthard, who I believe is not consistently on the level of Hill, Hakkinen, Schumacher or Senna. Hill could easily have been a 2 or 3 time champion. Hill did wonders in BS cars [eg: the Brabham he was driving when Frank Williams noticed him; the Arrows in which he came 1 corner short of winning the Hungarian GP in 1997].
Back to my point, who decides who is supremely talented? I think it is the press. Michael Schumacher came into Formula 1 with hype. Karl Wendlinger, his old Mercedes teammate, got his F1 break first. Everyone said, "Hey that Austrian kid's talented, but wait until you see this Michael Schumacher kid from Germany!" Jan Magnussen was supposed to be the second coming of Senna. Rubens Barrichello was supposed to be the new Senna. The press said, "Sure Mika Hakkinen is good, but wait until you see that other Mika [Salo]!" Nowadays, for some reason, Felipe Massa is supposed to be the man on the move. No one said a thing about Fernando Alonso being a potential world champion while he was impressing in the Minardi, yet Kimi Raikonnen was supposed to be the new Hakkinen.
I'm not trying to call myself a Ken Tyrrell, but I saw something in all of the following drivers when they were struggling with crap cars, underfinanced teams, and no sponsors. They were focused, organized, realized early that F1 chances are rare, and they took advantage of every opportunity to impress:
Fernando Alonso
Michael Schumacher
Ayrton Senna
Michele Alboreto
Stefan Bellof
Keke Rosberg
Alan Jones
Nelson Piquet
Gerhard Berger
Alesandro Nannini
Stefan Johannson
Ricardo Patrese
Eddie Irvine
Damon Hill
Mika Hakkinen
Alain Prost
Johnny Herbert
Alexander Zanardi
Olivier Panis
Niki Lauda
Ivan Capelli
Roberto Moreno
Mark Webber
Marc Gene
Pedro delaRosa
Christian Klein
These guys IMHO demonstrated something I believe all champions must have-- that fire in the belly [as John Watson puts it] to figure out how to maximize every opportunity. I'm not saying other drivers aren't as talented, but these drivers, even though some of them never became [or haven't yet] world champions, had/have everything you needed to be one.
Now just to head off a few attacks, there were some guys who hung around long enough to figure it out like Nigel Mansell, Jody Scheckter, John Watson, Gilles Villeneuve and Didier Pironi. Talent alone is not enough.
Some of your comments on this would be interesting.
Chris
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:11 am
by Julian Mayo
It still hurts me that Wendlinger never had the opportunity to demonstrate his ability to the world. If he had, the record books, and of course this is only my humble opinion, would feature his name repeatedly.
Good post Chris,
Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:13 am
by backmarker
The GREATEST always do their best to win, at whatever the cost. F1 is a team event but, when you are in the cockpit and on the race track, the greatest drivers become the most selfish. Remember Senna? Villeneuve snr? Prost? Mansell? These drivers had little respect for anything else apart for the top step of the podium. No respect for the cars, the tyres, the team, the rules, the other drivers. Kamikaze baby!!!! Win or Bust!!!
Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:13 am
by backmarker
The GREATEST always do their best to win, at whatever the cost. F1 is a team event but, when you are in the cockpit and on the race track, the greatest drivers become the most selfish. Remember Senna? Villeneuve snr? Prost? Mansell? These drivers had little respect for anything else apart for the top step of the podium. No respect for the cars, the tyres, the team, the rules, the other drivers. Kamikaze baby!!!! Win or Bust!!!
Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:21 am
by JayVee
Michael is on his own when it comes to defining "at whatever cost"
And now we have Alonso who doesn't need to disrespect other drivers in order to win championships or races.
He is on track to be one of the greatest, he does his best to win but not "at whatever the cost". He respects the rules and the other drivers.
He makes it all look too easy
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:09 am
by F1-NUT
RE30B#16 wrote:
I mean no disrespect to F1-NUT,
Hi Chris - nice to put a name to a handle...
Go on, a little bit of disrespect never hurt anybody - now being nice to each other all the time - that's just not natural is it! 
Heh!
RE30B#16 wrote:but it is interesting how we decide who is supremely talented, and who is not. Damon Hill is a tremendously gifted driver. He was partnered with the best of the best in Ayrton Senna, held his own, and had a better relationship with the great man than he managed to get out of David Coulthard, who I believe is not consistently on the level of Hill, Hakkinen, Schumacher or Senna. Hill could easily have been a 2 or 3 time champion. Hill did wonders in BS cars [eg: the Brabham he was driving when Frank Williams noticed him; the Arrows in which he came 1 corner short of winning the Hungarian GP in 1997.
Back to my point, who decides who is supremely talented? I think it is the press. Michael Schumacher came into Formula 1 with hype. Karl Wendlinger, his old Mercedes teammate, got his F1 break first. Everyone said, "Hey that Austrian kid's talented, but wait until you see this Michael Schumacher kid from Germany!" Jan Magnussen was supposed to be the second coming of Senna. Rubens Barrichello was supposed to be the new Senna. The press said, "Sure Mika Hakkinen is good, but wait until you see that other Mika [Salo]!" Nowadays, for some reason, Felipe Massa is supposed to be the man on the move. No one said a thing about Fernando Alonso being a potential world champion while he was impressing in the Minardi, yet Kimi Raikonnen was supposed to be the new Hakkinen.
Some of your comments on this would be interesting.
Chris
I think you make valid points about the press influencing us about who is good or who is bad - but do you really think that regular fans swallow such nonsense? We saw Schumacher in the rain, we have seen the way he gets unbelievable laptimes and wins championships with cars that shouldn't be in the top three never mind winning. Put Schuie in Button's Honda and do we really believe he wouldn't be winning in it (or moaning about the brake ? WE saw how Hill was unpredictable - for all his smooth driving technique (and my desire for him to win) he didn't have the killer instinct - he was continously tripping up over back markers - back markers that a Senna, a Prost, a Mansel or a Schuie would scythe through. So I have to regretfully disagree with your assessment of 'driving ability' it is not about being the fastest smoothest driver, it's about being on the top of your game. Hill and Senna on a par? No. Not at all, as much as I would love that to be the case, but sadly no.
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:17 am
by Snowy
Damon started in F1 at a very late age after a career on motorbikes, he never had the karting apprenticeship that is necessary to be really quick in a F1 car. Schuey would be at the back of the grid in a Honda, that car is designed specifically for Jenson's style. There is no way that Schuey could turn a mediocre car into a consistent race winner. He only won one race last season due to it being one of only six in the race. Mika Hakkinen beat schuey consistently with a car on a par or only marginally better. Like every other driver on the grid Schuey needs the complete package and good fortune to win.
Damon was the only guy I've seen in recent times put a pitifully weak car in a position to win. He did it twice once in an Arrow where he would have won were it not for a 10 penny washer and then he gave Jordan their first win. Those cars were total sh*t* compared to every car Schuey has ever driven without exception.
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:24 am
by RE30B#16
F1-NUT wrote:RE30B#16 wrote:
I mean no disrespect to F1-NUT,
Hi Chris - nice to put a name to a handle...
Go on, a little bit of disrespect never hurt anybody - now being nice to each other all the time - that's just not natural is it! Heh!
You got that right!
WE saw how Hill was unpredictable - for all his smooth driving technique (and my desire for him to win) he didn't have the killer instinct - he was continously tripping up over back markers - back markers that a Senna, a Prost, a Mansel or a Schuie would scythe through. So I have to regretfully disagree with your assessment of 'driving ability' it is not about being the fastest smoothest driver, it's about being on the top of your game. Hill and Senna on a par? No. Not at all, as much as I would love that to be the case, but sadly no.[/color]
Well, I can accept everything else you said except the Hill had no killer instinct. Damon Hill was a gentleman racer in an era of brutes. He was a throwback very similar to his dad who they said would've been more successful a decade earlier. But if Damon was not in the class of Senna and Schumacher
, he is certainly on that second tier of talent, and higher than David Coulthard. He did have that season lost [1995], but I think he made most of his mistakes due the competition within the Williams team. Williams never treated him very well [probably because Damon was his own man]. In '96, he cleaned up his style, and took the championship despite his own team being his harshest critic. At his dismissal, I certainly hope he flipped Frank Williams and Partirck Head the bird, but knowing Damon, his class won out.
Hill was a very worthy and talented world champion indeed.
Chris
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 6:52 pm
by F1-NUT
RE30B#16 wrote:
Well, I can accept everything else you said except the Hill had no killer instinct. Damon Hill was a gentleman racer in an era of brutes. He was a throwback very similar to his dad who they said would've been more successful a decade earlier. But if Damon was not in the class of Senna and Schumacher , he is certainly on that second tier of talent, and higher than David Coulthard. He did have that season lost [1995], but I think he made most of his mistakes due the competition within the Williams team. Williams never treated him very well [probably because Damon was his own man]. In '96, he cleaned up his style, and took the championship despite his own team being his harshest critic. At his dismissal, I certainly hope he flipped Frank Williams and Partirck Head the bird, but knowing Damon, his class won out.
Hill was a very worthy and talented world champion indeed.
Chris
I think, for me, when Damon went across that finish line as World Champion and thanked his team over the radio, the team that had all ready sacked him, it was one of the most poignent moments ever in F1. I SO wanted him to win, and God, how he deserved it. So I'm not knocking Hill - and never, ever would. He is a class act through and through and infinitely more worthy a champion that Schumacher could ever hope to be. I have never really forgiven Williams - hell - I never will do. I spent the next week just reading and rereading all the newspapers, replaying my video, I just couldn't get enough of it. I was on a high for weeks. So I'm not dissing the man. But boy didn't he make it hard for himself. What a relief when he finally won.
C'mon Button!
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:51 am
by Irishsnake
Hi F1 Nut but i think u really have a very bias opinion of Schumacher cause lets be honest what open and honest F1 fan can really believe Hill a better champion .....he won in the best car which was alot better than the rivals
Some of Schumachers title where won in an inferior car does that not say it all
So Hill might drive a very good car well but Schumacher makes a poor car a winning car time and time again
BUT as usual thats my opinion !!!!
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:59 am
by Snowy
Irishsnake wrote:Some of Schumachers title where won in an inferior car does that not say it all
BUT as usual thats my opinion !!!!
Schuey won his championships in pretty damned fine equipment if you ask me or the teams that provided them.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:09 pm
by F1-NUT
Irishsnake wrote:Hi F1 Nut but i think u really have a very bias opinion of Schumacher cause lets be honest what open and honest F1 fan can really believe Hill a better champion .....he won in the best car which was alot better than the rivals
Some of Schumachers title where won in an inferior car does that not say it all
So Hill might drive a very good car well but Schumacher makes a poor car a winning car time and time again
BUT as usual thats my opinion !!!!
I've said before many times that Schumacher is a better driver - and that he can make inferior cars win. But on the flip side, just because you have got a great car beneath you doesn't mean that you are going to win with average talent. Hill was a fantastically smooth driver and a more worthy champion than Schumacher because Schumacher is a cheat. But please, reread my postings on this thread, as I'm not going into that again.
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:33 am
by Snowy
Damon won all his GP's with inferior teams the equipment might have be good but the strategy was always dodgy at Williams. And the team never focused on one driver. MS has never won a GP without Ross morebrainsthan Brawn. It's team work that maketh the man. Would Valentino be winning without Jerry Burgess? Perhaps but not as consistently and I doubt ever on a Yamaha.