Rosberg vs. Schumacher 2010-2012

[kiseca]

LDN said:

The most successful; yes. The stats reflect this. The best? No way...

Remember, the Spice Girls are the most successful 'group' in history (well, maybe). You get the picture.

I know the picture you're talking about, yes. The Best will be a different answer from everyone whether it's about music or motor racing or whatever. There are no measures to conclude who is the best or greatest because there is no consensus on how to measure greatness. For a professional musician or sportsperson however, success is easy to measure and I would not be surprised if the Spice Girls have had more commercial success than, say, Neil Young.

Now, personally I'd much rather listen to Neil Young, but sales might show that more people would rather listen to The Spice Girls. Now as a professional musician, that makes the Spice Girls more successful (if they actually saw much of the profit). As entertainers, it still makes The Spice Girls more successful. But there's no way on Earth that you'll get me to admit that they are better than Neil Young. Why? Frankly I couldn't tell you in any way that would matter if you had the opposite opinion.

Edited by kiseca on Wednesday 17th December 14:19

[LDN]

Agent Orange said:

LDN said:

The most successful; yes. The stats reflect this. The best? No way...

Remember, the Spice Girls are the most successful 'group' in history (well, maybe). You get the picture.

All comes down to whatever your measure of "best" is.

Alonso is, according to many, the best F1 driver on the grid. But best by what measure? Best at getting the closest to theoretical maximum out of a car or best at overtaking, strategy, defending, developing the car etc. etc.

It would be difficult to argue against Schumacher by those measures given his domination for a period of years.

Likewise as much as Vettel's driving style bores the hell out of me it's again difficult to argue that he wasn't the best for a particular period of years.

Vettel lent on aero and blown diffusors over those years; that's already been established. We see now that he's not as great as, again, the stats would have you believe. Every year he won the WDC, the team bosses voted Alonso their best driver of the season. So Vettel had more success but Alonso was seen as the superior by the F1 teams. Stats only show so much so all anyone has to favour MS is his stats; but there's more to it than that; that's where my Spice Girls analogy comes in. I'm not trying to be clever; merely stating that Rosberg showed how good he was against MS - but also, that MS may not be other worldy. Just like the Spice Girls had a juggernaut behind them and all the chips stacked in their favour; MS had the same - in a way that was never seen and has never been seen since. It will forever taint his record.

[kiseca]

LDN said:

Vettel lent on aero and blown diffusors over those years; that's already been established. We see now that he's not as great as, again, the stats would have you believe. Every year he won the WDC, the team bosses voted Alonso their best driver of the season. So Vettel had more success but Alonso was seen as the superior by the F1 teams. Stats only show so much so all anyone has to favour MS is his stats; but there's more to it than that; that's where my Spice Girls analogy comes in. I'm not trying to be clever; merely stating that Rosberg showed how good he was against MS - but also, that MS may not be other worldy. Just like the Spice Girls had a juggernaut behind them and all the chips stacked in their favour; MS had the same - in a way that was never seen and has never been seen since. It will forever taint his record.

This is all true. It is impossible to separate MS's performance from that of the package as a whole even more so than other drivers because he defeated his teammates at the negotiating table before they had even stepped in the car.

In the other hand it is (I think... I haven't actually tried this with the Spice Girls ) that it is an awful lot easier to find YouTube videos of ex team mates, opponents, team bosses etc saying that Schumy was on a higher level than the others than it would be to find experts praising the talents of The Spice Girls.

i.e. what made the Spice Girls so bankable was that they were a marketing dream and could sing. With Schumacher it was exceptional driving talent and an unprecedented level of commitment. That's why the juggernaut got behind him. It definitely was not because of his good looks, that's for sure!

Edited by kiseca on Wednesday 17th December 18:23

[Agent Orange]

LDN said:

Just like the Spice Girls had a juggernaut behind them and all the chips stacked in their favour; MS had the same - in a way that was never seen and has never been seen since. It will forever taint his record.

Sorry but I don't buy it that Schumacher had the chips stacked in his favour for his entire career across many changes in the formula.

Is Hamilton's 2014 WDC tainted because he was in a Mercedes? Or is Alonso's career tainted because despite the constantly being referred to as the best driver on the grid he's delivered no where near the results his talent should deserve?

Schumacher was an exceptional driver.

[entropy]

LDN said:

I'm only an armchair critic but MS's records do not paint a clear picture; massive bias to him as an individual and Ferrari as a team have tainted his legacy... which was further tainted by his comeback: getting trounced week in / week out by Rosberg. And let's be honest; he was trounced. People say that he was passed his prime, etc etc... but he still took part in competitive motorsport / karting and whilst the hunger may be different; his skills were intact. Rosberg showed how good he was against MS; and MS was shown as the 'great but not so great as one might believe' driver he is. IMO.

IMHO Schumi's best years were at Ferrari 97-99 and up against Newey and challenging for WDC.

[Rockstar]

Personally I prefer Talking Heads despite them selling less albums than the Spice Girls(wow didn't know they were the most successful musical group- they only made music for about 5 years?).

However I digress, using a mediocre pop group's success as an analogy is a bit weak. Everyone including their fans knew the Spice Girls were not very good at all when they were at their peak for about 2 or 3 years. For more than a decade even the biggest MS critics had to begrudgingly concede he was exceptionally talented. His statistics sure don't paint the full picture as he spent more than half his seasons in the 2nd or 3rd best car/team on the grid.

TBH You Tube clips do not convey the incredible impact of a new young driver arriving in F1 in the early 90's and being immediately competitive at the time, it was unprecedented and by consistently being right at the top level of drivers(easily arguable the best driver during that period) from '92 to '06 indicates he was no one hit wonder.

Love him or hate him he was a not unjustified phenomena, he was genuinely very good. Sometimes I wonder if the most ardent Schumacher detractors were following and watching F1 in the late 80's through the 90's? If they were and believe he was actually just average... well then I don't know what to say.

[LDN]

Never said he was average... simply not as 'great' as the stats would have us believe. Can't take anything away from him; and the Spice Girls thing was only meant as a vague analogy - but it's seemed to have grown legs!

Again, the sport has never seen anything like the bias he enjoyed - both his team and he as an individual; he's not had to fight like Lewis has this year - against an equal teammate in an equal car and with equal chances. As well, the Ferrari enjoyed bespoke tyres that no other car enjoyed; how anyone can say that these facts do not taint his legacy is beyond me but; hey ho

Also, wasn't there talk - much like Vettel with aero; that he lent on traction control; i.e - did he ever win a WDC without traction control? Not rhetorical... maybe he did. There was talk that his comeback was affected by the fact there was none and that when it was man and machine; traction wise; he found it difficult.

Before his comeback; I had a friend and big MS fan tell me he was going to blow away these new drivers and show them how it's done. I said at the time; I'd bet my lot that he won't. I knew in my gut that he was not as untouchable as his record indicated and that the level had gone up another level. His comeback was less than mediocre, I think it's safe to say. And it raised a lot of questions. However, good on him for having the passion to have another crack at it.

[MarcusFenix1000]

LDN said:

Also, wasn't there talk - much like Vettel with aero; that he lent on traction control; i.e - did he ever win a WDC without traction control? Not rhetorical... maybe he did. There was talk that his comeback was affected by the fact there was none and that when it was man and machine; traction wise; he found it difficult.

HAHAHAHA

You've just demonstrated that you have no clue what you're talking about and your argument has just lost all credibility. Traction control was banned for 7 seasons from the start of 1994 through to the end of 2000. During that time, Michael Schumacher won 3 world championships and 42 races. During that 7 years, he won more races than anyone in the history of Formula 1 with the exception of Prost.

And during those 7 years, how many races did he have in the best car? First 6 races of 94 perhaps? Following that, he didn't sit behind the steering wheel of the best car until 2001. So I think it's safe to assume that Michael Schumacher had no problem in the absence of traction control, especially when you watch some of the wet races he drove during that period.

[LDN]

MarcusFenix1000 said:

LDN said:

Also, wasn't there talk - much like Vettel with aero; that he lent on traction control; i.e - did he ever win a WDC without traction control? Not rhetorical... maybe he did. There was talk that his comeback was affected by the fact there was none and that when it was man and machine; traction wise; he found it difficult.

HAHAHAHA

You've just demonstrated that you have no clue what you're talking about and your argument has just lost all credibility. Traction control was banned for 7 seasons from the start of 1994 through to the end of 2000. During that time, Michael Schumacher won 3 world championships and 42 races. During that 7 years, he won more races than anyone in the history of Formula 1 with the exception of Prost.

And during those 7 years, how many races did he have in the best car? First 6 races of 94 perhaps? Following that, he didn't sit behind the steering wheel of the best car until 2001. So I think it's safe to assume that Michael Schumacher had no problem in the absence of traction control, especially when you watch some of the wet races he drove during that period.

... I think you'll find there's more to it than first appears; re' traction control, specifically. Teams buried traction control in their menu systems and had no visual recognition of it being activated. The 94' season you speak of was when this was widely known in the paddock but - like Red Bull flexi-wing, never proven. I'm not saying he's undeserving; just that re' traction control; it was a debate that had been had before.

Also, we're not debating how great MS was; merely - whether he was as great as the stats would have one believe. Add to that; Rosberg consistently beating him and it does, inevitably, add fuel to the fiery debate. Schuey came in and raised the stakes with regard professionalism and fitness; of that there is no doubt. I just think that things have gone up another gear now and his comeback was never going to go well (2010 - 2012) as per the thread title.

[MarcusFenix1000]

LDN said:

... I think you'll find there's more to it than first appears; re' traction control, specifically. Teams buried traction control in their menu systems and had no visual recognition of it being activated.

So now you're trying to say that Benetton and Ferrari both hid their traction control and Schumacher went 7 whole seasons using it against the rules? Do you realise how absurd that sounds when you say it out loud?

LDN said:

Add to that; Rosberg consistently beating him and it does, inevitably, add fuel to the fiery debate. Schuey came in and raised the stakes with regard professionalism and fitness; of that there is no doubt. I just think that things have gone up another gear now and his comeback was never going to go well (2010 - 2012) as per the thread title.

The number one weapon in the arsenal of any Schumacher hater or naysayer is 2010-2012. The truth of the matter is that he was already out of the game for 3 years, and he was in his 40's. In 2012, he did very well compared to Rosberg but suffered the majority of the reliability problems in the team, plus his own stupid mistakes which came with his age. He beat Rosberg 7-3 in races were both cars finished in 2012. This is the same Rosberg who is very close to Hamilton today. Ultimately in 2012, he was 10 years out of his prime and he was 43 years old.

Just look at Mike Tyson's career. He was a fantastic boxer and went 37 fights without a single loss. But as he got older, he became a punching bag and he retired as a joke and a rejected has-been. I'm not saying that F1 comes with anything like the strain that boxing does, but all sporting greats start to deteriorate when they get into their late 30's.

With the exception of Golf, has there ever been a sportsman/woman that has experienced their best years of sport in their 40's?

[LDN]

MarcusFenix1000 said:

LDN said:

... I think you'll find there's more to it than first appears; re' traction control, specifically. Teams buried traction control in their menu systems and had no visual recognition of it being activated.

So now you're trying to say that Benetton and Ferrari both hid their traction control and Schumacher went 7 whole seasons using it against the rules? Do you realise how absurd that sounds when you say it out loud?

Not quite what I'm saying, no...

MarcusFenix1000 said:

LDN said:

Add to that; Rosberg consistently beating him and it does, inevitably, add fuel to the fiery debate. Schuey came in and raised the stakes with regard professionalism and fitness; of that there is no doubt. I just think that things have gone up another gear now and his comeback was never going to go well (2010 - 2012) as per the thread title.

The number one weapon in the arsenal of any Schumacher hater or naysayer is 2010-2012. The truth of the matter is that he was already out of the game for 3 years, and he was in his 40's. In 2012, he did very well compared to Rosberg but suffered the majority of the reliability problems in the team, plus his own stupid mistakes which came with his age. He beat Rosberg 7-3 in races were both cars finished in 2012. This is the same Rosberg who is very close to Hamilton today. Ultimately in 2012, he was 10 years out of his prime and he was 43 years old.

Just look at Mike Tyson's career. He was a fantastic boxer and went 37 fights without a single loss. But as he got older, he became a punching bag and he retired as a joke and a rejected has-been. I'm not saying that F1 comes with anything like the strain that boxing does, but all sporting greats start to deteriorate when they get into their late 30's.

With the exception of Golf, has there ever been a sportsman/woman that has experienced their best years of sport in their 40's?

The number one reason??? Nahhhhh. I agree about his age / comeback... but there were plenty; many; in fact that said he'd clean up. Were you one of them? Perhaps not. Things have moved on; like I said; things have gone up another level so you and I are in agreement: that his comeback was never going to go well; I knew it. He was never going to be able to step up to the new level required; especially given his age, etc - as you rightly point out. Many believed that his records - that apparently back him up as the best ever - meant he'd dominate all the 'kids'. This about a man, who himself, deemed Senna the greatest. Someone with a lot less WDC's

Like it or not; and it is well documented. MS enjoyed an unrivalled / unseen / never heard of or seen again / advantage. He was able to see team-mates data and not have to show his own; that is a mark of a man that can never be deemed the greatest. Full stop. It's an opinion and you don't have to accept it. If you think that these things matter not; that's your right; but it says a lot if you can just ignore the bias. Simple and plain.

Which of the current drivers even attempt to make similar demands? Alonso maybe; but who else?

[kiseca]

LDN said:

Again, the sport has never seen anything like the bias he enjoyed - both his team and he as an individual; he's not had to fight like Lewis has this year - against an equal teammate in an equal car and with equal chances. As well, the Ferrari enjoyed bespoke tyres that no other car enjoyed; how anyone can say that these facts do not taint his legacy is beyond me but; hey ho

Selectively quoting you here, but that's because I have nothing to add or question about the rest of your post.

This paragraph though mentioned the bespoke tyres tainting his legacy. It didn't for me because I don't understand why bespoke tyres are seen any differently to a bespoke engine, a bespoke chassis or a bespoke aero package.

The champion has through history always had the best car or something near enough to it, because in reality it's the whole package that wins and the driver is just one component that can make a difference, just like all the others. Fangio understood the importance of being in a top car, so did Senna. The tyres are just another component, if you have an opportunity to maximise the quality of that component, why wouldn't you?

[LDN]

kiseca said:

LDN said:

Again, the sport has never seen anything like the bias he enjoyed - both his team and he as an individual; he's not had to fight like Lewis has this year - against an equal teammate in an equal car and with equal chances. As well, the Ferrari enjoyed bespoke tyres that no other car enjoyed; how anyone can say that these facts do not taint his legacy is beyond me but; hey ho

Selectively quoting you here, but that's because I have nothing to add or question about the rest of your post.

This paragraph though mentioned the bespoke tyres tainting his legacy. It didn't for me because I don't understand why bespoke tyres are seen any differently to a bespoke engine, a bespoke chassis or a bespoke aero package.

The champion has through history always had the best car or something near enough to it, because in reality it's the whole package that wins and the driver is just one component that can make a difference, just like all the others. Fangio understood the importance of being in a top car, so did Senna. The tyres are just another component, if you have an opportunity to maximise the quality of that component, why wouldn't you?

Thanks; read up about the tyres; it was more to do with the fact that the tyres were built around the Fez'. Meaning that the all teams were fooked before they even got started; it wasn't an even playing field.

Whilst all winners have enjoyed the best package to some degree; there has to, at least, be the opportunity for all teams to field a car that can potentially be on a par / compete with the rest. Being handicapped from the get-go is a little off'.

[LDN]

With regard the thread title; maybe it's been posted before - but in simple terms:

Qualifying

Faster qualifying time: Rosberg 41 / Schumacher 17
Poles: Rosberg 1 / Schumacher 
0
Front rows: Rosberg 2 / Schumacher 1

Races

Wins: Rosberg 1 / Schumacher 0
Podiums: Rosberg 5 / Schumacher 1
Points finishes: Rosberg 39 / Schumacher 31
DNFs: Rosberg 7 / Schumacher 15
Best race result (inc DNFs): Rosberg 35 / Schumacher 22
Ahead in two-car finish: Rosberg 22 / Schumacher 15

The only stat that MS wins on is DNF's! The word "ouch" springs to mind. But as I said; fair play for him giving it a shot.

[MarcusFenix1000]

LDN said:

This about a man, who himself, deemed Senna the greatest. Someone with a lot less WDC's

And with the exception of Jackie Stewart, which driver would describe themselves as the best driver of all time? All drivers are modest when asked such questions. What a silly argument to present

LDN said:

Thanks; read up about the tyres; it was more to do with the fact that the tyres were built around the Fez'. Meaning that the all teams were fooked before they even got started; it wasn't an even playing field.

Whilst all winners have enjoyed the best package to some degree; there has to, at least, be the opportunity for all teams to field a car that can potentially be on a par / compete with the rest. Being handicapped from the get-go is a little off'.

And as I previously said, what about the races that Schumacher won from 94-2000 when he did not have the bespoke Bridgestone tyres? (McLaren had the same Bridgestones in 1999 and 2000). There were 42 of them, a figure that no one other than Prost has managed to achieve in F1 history.

Are you going to tell me he had bespoke Goodyear tyres?

Oh no, wait, I forgot. You already said that the reason for Schumacher's success from 94-2000 was because of traction control and his success from 2001-2006 was because of bespoke tyres. Whatever you say

[anonymous-user]

MarcusFenix1000 said:

With the exception of Golf, has there ever been a sportsman/woman that has experienced their best years of sport in their 40's?

You don't even need to look outside F1 or motorsport in general.

Juan Manuel Fangio, born june 1911, active GP years 1950 - 1958

won 5 world championships, all in his 40's.

I won 2 car sprint championships this year, age 49.

[entropy]

LDN said:

As well, the Ferrari enjoyed bespoke tyres that no other car enjoyed; how anyone can say that these facts do not taint his legacy is beyond me but; hey ho

It's a bit of myth. Certainly true in the early 2000s to 2005 in the B'stone & Michelin tyre war. Not true in 2006 - B'stone developed stiffer construction which Ferrari struggled with for half a season.


In the Goodyear/B'stone tyre war the Ferrari could be hard on its tyres.

1992 Benetton - no TC, sequential shift, no active suspension. Mansell said there were moments that year where he had to "wake up" and make sure he was gapping Schumi. Won a race - no surprise in your arguement that it wasn't on merit.

[MarcusFenix1000]

jsf said:

You don't even need to look outside F1 or motorsport in general.

Juan Manuel Fangio, born june 1911, active GP years 1950 - 1958

And are you telling me that if Juan Manuel Fangio were to jump into a time machine, he would step into a modern F1 car and see similar results? He would have to lose a few pounds before he could even fit in one. Formula one in those days was a bunch of rich amateurs, nothing more.

jsf said:

I won 2 car sprint championships this year, age 49.

Perhaps Ron Dennis and everyone else at Woking were deliberating over the wrong drivers then.

[LDN]

MarcusFenix1000 said:

LDN said:

This about a man, who himself, deemed Senna the greatest. Someone with a lot less WDC's

And with the exception of Jackie Stewart, which driver would describe themselves as the best driver of all time? All drivers are modest when asked such questions. What a silly argument to present

LDN said:

Thanks; read up about the tyres; it was more to do with the fact that the tyres were built around the Fez'. Meaning that the all teams were fooked before they even got started; it wasn't an even playing field.

Whilst all winners have enjoyed the best package to some degree; there has to, at least, be the opportunity for all teams to field a car that can potentially be on a par / compete with the rest. Being handicapped from the get-go is a little off'.

And as I previously said, what about the races that Schumacher won from 94-2000 when he did not have the bespoke Bridgestone tyres? (McLaren had the same Bridgestones in 1999 and 2000). There were 42 of them, a figure that no one other than Prost has managed to achieve in F1 history.

Are you going to tell me he had bespoke Goodyear tyres?

Oh no, wait, I forgot. You already said that the reason for Schumacher's success from 94-2000 was because of traction control and his success from 2001-2006 was because of bespoke tyres. Whatever you say

The thread is about 2010 - 2012. Where he was shown up. For whatever reason; that's how it is. You agree with that Sorted.

Agree to disagree on the rest of it; no mention of the bias and the advantage demanded by / afforded him... but that's cool. Rose tint glasses engaged. A great he is; the greatest; he is not.

[BigBen]

entropy said:

1992 Benetton - no TC, sequential shift, no active suspension. Mansell said there were moments that year where he had to "wake up" and make sure he was gapping Schumi. Won a race - no surprise in your arguement that it wasn't on merit.

The 1992 win was a result of the upgraded Renault power units failing on the Williams. Still impressive but not entirely down to the driver.