Rosberg vs. Schumacher 2010-2012

Rosberg vs. Schumacher 2010-2012

Author
Discussion

MontyBarker

6 posts

111 months

Wednesday 3rd December 2014
quotequote all
RichB said:
Sorry, you posted nonsense about what I sounded like when I'm sure I wasn't shouting that loud...
the men in white coats will be along soon
biglaugh
LOL at the irony in that post wink

RichB

51,434 posts

283 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
byebye

entropy

5,403 posts

202 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
MontyBarker said:
While Schumacher never had a "strong" team mate, he did have several seasons in the second best car that was much slower than the pace setting Williams/McLaren and he still won multiple races and challenged for the title. This was especially the case in 97 and 98 when he won 11 races, none of which where in the best car. This makes up for not having a team mate on his level because instead he was competing against faster, Adrian Newey designed cars.
Completely disagree.

What Hamilton achieved in 2009 is no different to what Schumi achieved in 1996 ie. got the best out of their mediocre cars and got wins in them.

Possessing innate ability to maximize a car simply does not make up the fact of not having a team mate on his level.

We've never seen LH go so low as to cheat or become a pantomime villian in his WDC battles. How would have Schumi handle a psychological and political warfare? There is no doubt that Schumi would have cracked on the former and "prove a point" as evidenced in pushing racing etiquette to extremes and even cheat.


550man

163 posts

161 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
I would like to start off this post by saying that I have unbounded respect for all F1 drivers (and drivers in other categories too of course!). They are all infinitely more capable than anything I could achieve in that sphere and, for the most part, when discussing top ranking drivers (whether of the same era or across the eras) one is often really only looking at the finest slithers of a degree here and there. None of these drivers are 'terrible' or 'rubbish' or anything of the kind.

That being said, having begun watching F1 properly from the late 80s and seeing virtually all of the races through to today, I regard Schumacher as the most complete and devastating of them all.

If one thinks of the changes that he went through and stayed at the top (by which I mean the top 10 of the grid throughout his career including the final 3 years) it is astonishing. He drove in the manual gearbox era, the full slicks and grooved tyres era, at least three iterations of qualifying (the two day, one lap, and 3 session qualifying session period), the no-frills steering wheel to hyper complex steering wheel (completely changing the style of racing), refueling to no-refueling among others. He won in all those periods.

One of the points often raised is that he never had a strong team-mate. Again, I think this is misleading. There is no such thing as a bad F1 driver (with a few notable exceptions - take a bow Taki Inoue...). I agree Irvine, Barrichello and Massa were not at the level of Hakkinen, Alonso, Hamilton, Rosberg etc but it has to be remembered that the rebuilding of Ferrari was a very personal project to Schumacher. He invested an enormous amount into the process and was fundamental to the successful team that was built around him (Ross Brawn, Aldo Costa etc). That team needed a leader in 1995. Someone who the team could believe in and his suggestions and recommendations paid off (like pushing for Brawn to be hired). As an earlier poster highlighted, the evidence suggests that there was no 'formal' contractual rights that Schumacher had but, as he demonstrated he was faster than his teammates he was then given certain preferential treatment (not unlike Fangio taking over his team mate's car when his broke down...).

Yes he had his flaws (I would cite Jerez 97 into Villeneuve as the main one. For reasons I won't go into here for fear of boring everyone, I am of the view that Adelaide 94, while ruthless was justifiable by the standards of the day and Monaco 2006(?) was inspired (but that may just be me). However, I truly believe that these instances were the result of the almost superhuman effort he had to put in to compete, in those years, with significantly superior machinery and coming so close to beating them against all the odds. Yes, they may have been unsportsmanlike and even wrong, but 3 incidents over a 20 odd year career is not bad and is no worse than many others from the generation in which he started (teams and drivers have bent the rules throughout the history of F1).

That's it really. Many will disagree or have different perspectives which is absolutely fine. We all look for, and get, something different out of the sports we watch.

If you have managed to make it to the end of this, congratulations!

mattshiz

461 posts

140 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
entropy said:
We've never seen LH go so low as to cheat or become a pantomime villian in his WDC battles. How would have Schumi handle a psychological and political warfare? There is no doubt that Schumi would have cracked on the former and "prove a point" as evidenced in pushing racing etiquette to extremes and even cheat.
Not in WDC battle, but him and McLaren did try and cheat their way to a podium in Australia 2009, lying about his off track excursion under the final safety car which Trulli almost took the fall for.

thegreenhell

15,115 posts

218 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
mattshiz said:
Not in WDC battle, but him and McLaren did try and cheat their way to a podium in Australia 2009, lying about his off track excursion under the final safety car which Trulli almost took the fall for.
That was pretty much all the team, and specifically his engineer. He was just naive enough to go along with it afterwards. It was clear from the radio messages that he wanted to do the right thing at the time.

He's never pulled any underhand tricks on the track, unlike others.

hairyben

8,516 posts

182 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
MontyBarker said:
hairyben said:
Oh come on. for someone who finds a context to present schumachers 93-49 mauling at the hands of rosberg, for a fleeting moment, as favourable to schumacher I expected something a little more droll...
And if I were seeking an electrician, I would probably go for someone with a much more professional looking website. Then again, I probably wouldn't find your website in the first place seen as how it does so poorly in Google's search results. Perhaps if you spent less time leaving troll posts about F1's most successful driver of all time (and nothing you say can change that) you would perhaps see better results.

Edited by MontyBarker on Wednesday 3rd December 23:26
wow. what else have you got in the arsenal, "your mom so fat jokes?" seriously are you like 12?

Schumacher did nothing more than embarrass himself on his return, and almost his whole career was carefully managed never to have the challenge a teammate who was allowed to fight him, and whichever way his groupies try to paint it it'll always flatter him, regardless the talent he had. Anyway most of his hapless fanboy devotees moved onto the next big thing years ago, I've haven't heard dirge like this for a long time, have you been held in stasis since 2005?

EskimoArapaho

5,135 posts

134 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
550man said:
3 incidents over a 20 odd year career is not bad !
Indeed. But it's not just three questionable incidents.

Don t get me wrong, I can't think of anyone other than Schumacher who could have delivered such success to Ferrari, but my specs are not so rose-tinted as yours.

kiseca

9,339 posts

218 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
hairyben said:
wow. what else have you got in the arsenal, "your mom so fat jokes?" seriously are you like 12?

Schumacher did nothing more than embarrass himself on his return, and almost his whole career was carefully managed never to have the challenge a teammate who was allowed to fight him, and whichever way his groupies try to paint it it'll always flatter him, regardless the talent he had. Anyway most of his hapless fanboy devotees moved onto the next big thing years ago, I've haven't heard dirge like this for a long time, have you been held in stasis since 2005?
To be fair it's no more juvenile than your "my opinion is fact and anyone who disagrees is a fanboy" response.

Agent Orange

2,194 posts

245 months

Thursday 4th December 2014
quotequote all
550man said:
I would like to start off this post by saying that I have unbounded respect for all F1 drivers (and drivers in other categories too of course!). They are all infinitely more capable than anything I could achieve in that sphere and, for the most part, when discussing top ranking drivers (whether of the same era or across the eras) one is often really only looking at the finest slithers of a degree here and there. None of these drivers are 'terrible' or 'rubbish' or anything of the kind.

That being said, having begun watching F1 properly from the late 80s and seeing virtually all of the races through to today, I regard Schumacher as the most complete and devastating of them all.

If one thinks of the changes that he went through and stayed at the top (by which I mean the top 10 of the grid throughout his career including the final 3 years) it is astonishing. He drove in the manual gearbox era, the full slicks and grooved tyres era, at least three iterations of qualifying (the two day, one lap, and 3 session qualifying session period), the no-frills steering wheel to hyper complex steering wheel (completely changing the style of racing), refueling to no-refueling among others. He won in all those periods.

One of the points often raised is that he never had a strong team-mate. Again, I think this is misleading. There is no such thing as a bad F1 driver (with a few notable exceptions - take a bow Taki Inoue...). I agree Irvine, Barrichello and Massa were not at the level of Hakkinen, Alonso, Hamilton, Rosberg etc but it has to be remembered that the rebuilding of Ferrari was a very personal project to Schumacher. He invested an enormous amount into the process and was fundamental to the successful team that was built around him (Ross Brawn, Aldo Costa etc). That team needed a leader in 1995. Someone who the team could believe in and his suggestions and recommendations paid off (like pushing for Brawn to be hired). As an earlier poster highlighted, the evidence suggests that there was no 'formal' contractual rights that Schumacher had but, as he demonstrated he was faster than his teammates he was then given certain preferential treatment (not unlike Fangio taking over his team mate's car when his broke down...).

Yes he had his flaws (I would cite Jerez 97 into Villeneuve as the main one. For reasons I won't go into here for fear of boring everyone, I am of the view that Adelaide 94, while ruthless was justifiable by the standards of the day and Monaco 2006(?) was inspired (but that may just be me). However, I truly believe that these instances were the result of the almost superhuman effort he had to put in to compete, in those years, with significantly superior machinery and coming so close to beating them against all the odds. Yes, they may have been unsportsmanlike and even wrong, but 3 incidents over a 20 odd year career is not bad and is no worse than many others from the generation in which he started (teams and drivers have bent the rules throughout the history of F1).

That's it really. Many will disagree or have different perspectives which is absolutely fine. We all look for, and get, something different out of the sports we watch.

If you have managed to make it to the end of this, congratulations!
Difficult to disagree with anything you've said although I'm not sure agree about him not having strong team mates. Grant Irvine was never championship material as he showed in '99 but much as I don't have a lot of time for Massa I cannot deny that on his day he is quick. Also from memory Barrichello kept Schumacher honest.

I do think Schumachers dominance forces many to unfairly play down his opponents or team mates but as you say he was at the top of his game through a lot of changes to the formula.

Compare that to Vettel who equally dominated but when the formula changes he struggles to adapt. This year being the obvious example but also in I think 2011 when the FIA banned blown diffusers but then re-instated them.

NRS

22,080 posts

200 months

Friday 12th December 2014
quotequote all
MontyBarker said:
While Schumacher never had a "strong" team mate, he did have several seasons in the second best car that was much slower than the pace setting Williams/McLaren and he still won multiple races and challenged for the title. This was especially the case in 97 and 98 when he won 11 races, none of which where in the best car. This makes up for not having a team mate on his level because instead he was competing against faster, Adrian Newey designed cars.

Also, the whole "not allowed to challenge him" is a fabrication of the actual truth which is that Ferrari backed the fastest driver and that was always Schumacher. You can see Eddie Irvine confirm that here - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x151ndi_f1-legend...

Irvine always came accross as a straight talking guy and I don't think he would just make up those kinds of things to hide the "true agenda". Schumacher was simply quicker, so he got the team's backing.

What I think most people other than blind Schumacher haters will agree on is that in 2012, he was pretty well matched with Rosberg and it was very close, just as Rosberg has been close to Hamilton in the past two seasons. But as I've already said, Schumacher was 10 years past his best in 2012 and despite that he was still close to Rosberg, who is close to Hamilton.

It's my belief that if Rosberg or Hamilton were put into a time machine and were Schumacher's teammate in 1996, neither of them would've been close to him.


Edited by MontyBarker on Wednesday 3rd December 23:31
I think Hamilton and Alonso could have, and that the difference would likely be the style of the car. They are the two drivers who have shown themselves to be adaptable to different types of cars from the current group. Vettel is devastating when in the right car, but this year has confirmed he doesn't have as much flexibility compared to the other two.

Schermerhorn

4,342 posts

188 months

Tuesday 16th December 2014
quotequote all
entropy said:
There is no doubt that Schumi would have cracked on the former and "prove a point" as evidenced in pushing racing etiquette to extremes and even cheat.
No doubt? How do you know? Lewis Hamilton hasn't exactly shown mental toughness throughout his F1 career. There has been frequent moments when his head has dropped and his team mate has bested him considerably.

Schumacher - not without his flaws - has never had 'mid season dips' like Hamilton has had (even as recent as 2014 during the summer FFS) and that is why I think he beats Hamilton 9 out of 10 times prime for prime.

It is all conjecture anyway. History and critics will ALWAYS paint Schumacher a certain way while people who have worked with him; Symonds, Todt, Briatore, Walkinshaw, Brundle, Brawn, Byrne, Chris Dyer etc will rate his as probably the best ever.

Whose opinion do you take more seriously? Arm chair and media critics or those who work in and round the sport?


LDN

8,905 posts

202 months

Tuesday 16th December 2014
quotequote all
Schermerhorn said:
entropy said:
There is no doubt that Schumi would have cracked on the former and "prove a point" as evidenced in pushing racing etiquette to extremes and even cheat.
Symonds, Todt, Briatore, Walkinshaw, Brundle, Brawn, Byrne, Chris Dyer etc will rate his as probably the best ever.

Whose opinion do you take more seriously? Arm chair and media critics or those who work in and round the sport?
Please link to evidence, that the people you have listed rate him as the 'best ever'. Not being sarcastic; please do it.

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.

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Tuesday 16th December 2014
quotequote all
There's a story that Herbert told of his time up against MS.

JH was excellent on his day and one of the fastest on the grid. With the right car there's no telling what he could have done.

He was always fast and pushed MS in qualifying, beating him once when it really upset his team leader. From that time on, MS's data was kept from JH but, of course, JH's was open to him.

That's not to suggest that JH would have beaten MS, or gone on to greater things, but to show that MS controlled his team mates. So, unlike, for instance, FA and LH, LH and NR, and others, there was no level playing field so one cannot use MS's dominance of team mates to prove his speed. It is not for nothing that Irvine was a long serving #2 to MS. Fast Eddie was, I think, one of the great F1 jokes.

There can be no argument that the Ferrari team was the best that we've seen in F1, notwithstanding Mercs' current year. I'm unaware of any fan who doesn't wear red who believes that it did not lead in pushing the regulations. Many felt, it would appear, that the FIA's rigour was variable. The team had tyres that were the fastest by some distance and they were bespoke to the team. Inters were a fine example of the special considerations for Ferrari.

Like it or not, F1 is a team sport. WDCs and WCCs are team prizes. If drivers are given equal opportunity then that is a battle of individuals to an extent, but not team treats drivers completely equally. Just the same car is not really enough. However, we all know that there was no equality in team Ferrari. So was MS the greatest? We'll never know.

But the team, which included Ms, was quality.

LDN

8,905 posts

202 months

Tuesday 16th December 2014
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
There's a story that Herbert told of his time up against MS.

JH was excellent on his day and one of the fastest on the grid. With the right car there's no telling what he could have done.

He was always fast and pushed MS in qualifying, beating him once when it really upset his team leader. From that time on, MS's data was kept from JH but, of course, JH's was open to him.

That's not to suggest that JH would have beaten MS, or gone on to greater things, but to show that MS controlled his team mates. So, unlike, for instance, FA and LH, LH and NR, and others, there was no level playing field so one cannot use MS's dominance of team mates to prove his speed. It is not for nothing that Irvine was a long serving #2 to MS. Fast Eddie was, I think, one of the great F1 jokes.

There can be no argument that the Ferrari team was the best that we've seen in F1, notwithstanding Mercs' current year. I'm unaware of any fan who doesn't wear red who believes that it did not lead in pushing the regulations. Many felt, it would appear, that the FIA's rigour was variable. The team had tyres that were the fastest by some distance and they were bespoke to the team. Inters were a fine example of the special considerations for Ferrari.

Like it or not, F1 is a team sport. WDCs and WCCs are team prizes. If drivers are given equal opportunity then that is a battle of individuals to an extent, but not team treats drivers completely equally. Just the same car is not really enough. However, we all know that there was no equality in team Ferrari. So was MS the greatest? We'll never know.

But the team, which included Ms, was quality.
Well said!

Schermerhorn

4,342 posts

188 months

Wednesday 17th December 2014
quotequote all
LDN said:
Schermerhorn said:
entropy said:
There is no doubt that Schumi would have cracked on the former and "prove a point" as evidenced in pushing racing etiquette to extremes and even cheat.
Symonds, Todt, Briatore, Walkinshaw, Brundle, Brawn, Byrne, Chris Dyer etc will rate his as probably the best ever.

Whose opinion do you take more seriously? Arm chair and media critics or those who work in and round the sport?
Please link to evidence, that the people you have listed rate him as the 'best ever'. Not being sarcastic; please do it.

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.
Schumacher was 'trounced' in 2010.

2011 was very competitive between the two; of ALL the scoring team mates Schumacher and Rosberg were the closest - seperated by 13 points.

2012 is something else; Schumacher had 2 points after 7 rounds while Rosberg had 62 points. In the end - oweing to reliability, Schumacher finished 'only' 43 points off Rosberg. Also, if I recall correctly, he lapped Roberg during their last race together despite at one point suffering a puncture and being 40 seconds down a HRT as he lost so much time.

Still, the stats paint a different picture and people can use them to say Rosberg 'destroyed' Schumacher all they want. The reality is that from mid-2011 they were very evenly matched to each other.

Schumacher's comeback was not a failure - towards the end he matched Rosberg and it is the same Rosberg who is now a very serious threat to Hamilton and justifiably a Top 5 driver now.

Paint it how you like, but Schumacher showed he was TOP flight driver over his 20 years in the sport and for me his consistency, longevity and work ethic make him THE best driver of all time.

LDN

8,905 posts

202 months

Wednesday 17th December 2014
quotequote all
Schermerhorn said:
LDN said:
Schermerhorn said:
entropy said:
There is no doubt that Schumi would have cracked on the former and "prove a point" as evidenced in pushing racing etiquette to extremes and even cheat.
Symonds, Todt, Briatore, Walkinshaw, Brundle, Brawn, Byrne, Chris Dyer etc will rate his as probably the best ever.

Whose opinion do you take more seriously? Arm chair and media critics or those who work in and round the sport?
Please link to evidence, that the people you have listed rate him as the 'best ever'. Not being sarcastic; please do it.

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.
Schumacher was 'trounced' in 2010.

2011 was very competitive between the two; of ALL the scoring team mates Schumacher and Rosberg were the closest - seperated by 13 points.

2012 is something else; Schumacher had 2 points after 7 rounds while Rosberg had 62 points. In the end - oweing to reliability, Schumacher finished 'only' 43 points off Rosberg. Also, if I recall correctly, he lapped Roberg during their last race together despite at one point suffering a puncture and being 40 seconds down a HRT as he lost so much time.

Still, the stats paint a different picture and people can use them to say Rosberg 'destroyed' Schumacher all they want. The reality is that from mid-2011 they were very evenly matched to each other.

Schumacher's comeback was not a failure - towards the end he matched Rosberg and it is the same Rosberg who is now a very serious threat to Hamilton and justifiably a Top 5 driver now.

Paint it how you like, but Schumacher showed he was TOP flight driver over his 20 years in the sport and for me his consistency, longevity and work ethic make him THE best driver of all time.
That's your opinion; his own opinion is that Senna was the best. So would you not listen to the man himself confused

Rosberg / MS - I wouldnt say Nico destroyed MS but he certainly trounced him. This is the guy who you claim is the best ever. As I say; I think people underestimated Rosberg so it's not all bad; but just like the stats don't back up your POV, neither do they paint a true portrayal of his success. As Derek put so well. In any case, we are all entitled to an opinion. And you can't knock his work ethic; that's one thing we can agree on.

kiseca

9,339 posts

218 months

Wednesday 17th December 2014
quotequote all
LDN said:
That's your opinion; his own opinion is that Senna was the best. So would you not listen to the man himself confused

Rosberg / MS - I wouldnt say Nico destroyed MS but he certainly trounced him. This is the guy who you claim is the best ever. As I say; I think people underestimated Rosberg so it's not all bad; but just like the stats don't back up your POV, neither do they paint a true portrayal of his success. As Derek put so well. In any case, we are all entitled to an opinion. And you can't knock his work ethic; that's one thing we can agree on.
The stats paint the most accurate picture of his success that you can get. Whatever way you might rate his speed, driving talent, or greatness, different people will have different values and conclusions, but regardless of those conclusions, he is undisputedly and by some margin the most successful driver in formula 1 history.

LDN

8,905 posts

202 months

Wednesday 17th December 2014
quotequote all
kiseca said:
LDN said:
That's your opinion; his own opinion is that Senna was the best. So would you not listen to the man himself confused

Rosberg / MS - I wouldnt say Nico destroyed MS but he certainly trounced him. This is the guy who you claim is the best ever. As I say; I think people underestimated Rosberg so it's not all bad; but just like the stats don't back up your POV, neither do they paint a true portrayal of his success. As Derek put so well. In any case, we are all entitled to an opinion. And you can't knock his work ethic; that's one thing we can agree on.
The stats paint the most accurate picture of his success that you can get. Whatever way you might rate his speed, driving talent, or greatness, different people will have different values and conclusions, but regardless of those conclusions, he is undisputedly and by some margin the most successful driver in formula 1 history.
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.

Agent Orange

2,194 posts

245 months

Wednesday 17th December 2014
quotequote all
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.