The Michael Schumacher Debate Thread
Discussion
Things are getting little silly over on the Damon at Adelaide thread but I am interested in exploring further the virtues of Michael Schumacher (or otherwise) beyond the outcome of the '94 season.
Of course, only the terminally thick would dispute the guy had hugely abundant speed, talent and skills. What intrigues me though, is the level of extraneous factors that contrived to somehow over-flatter these virtues. i.e....At Ferrari the car was built - and the team run - entirely around his needs, including the tyres. Which other driver in the history of motorsport, not just F1, has had tyres made to his exact specification? His time at Benetton coincided with the team pushing the regulations to and over the limit of legality. Then there was the parking and barging shenanigans, team orders and others.
I don't buy into the theory that all greats carry a flaw. Mika Häkkinen won two titles by fighting fairly. Hill, too. Even Hamilton for all his divisive personality traits has largely always driven 'professionally and fairly'.
What's the thinking here on all this then?
Of course, only the terminally thick would dispute the guy had hugely abundant speed, talent and skills. What intrigues me though, is the level of extraneous factors that contrived to somehow over-flatter these virtues. i.e....At Ferrari the car was built - and the team run - entirely around his needs, including the tyres. Which other driver in the history of motorsport, not just F1, has had tyres made to his exact specification? His time at Benetton coincided with the team pushing the regulations to and over the limit of legality. Then there was the parking and barging shenanigans, team orders and others.
I don't buy into the theory that all greats carry a flaw. Mika Häkkinen won two titles by fighting fairly. Hill, too. Even Hamilton for all his divisive personality traits has largely always driven 'professionally and fairly'.
What's the thinking here on all this then?
I don't have a problem with the 'dream team' ensemble at Ferrari - I think that's a measure of his ability, the fact that the other key players were willing to group around him and put all their eggs in that basket... funny how nobody was ever willing to do that with the media' current Messiah, Alonso...
In terms of driving standards/ruthlessness I don't think he was any different to Senna really. Both overstepped the mark on occasion, both could then use that on-track forever more as intimidation of their rivals. Sportsmanlike? - not really. Successful? - absolutely. I think Vettel tried to develop in this mold, but people like Webber gave him too much resistance early on so the intimidation never materialised.
Unquestionably, Schumacher had raw speed - probably more than anyone else of his generation. Just look at that Jordan qualifying performance. It was no accident that Benneton poached him and successful people in all fields of F1 continued to gravitate around him. If you're an F1 team manager, designer, engineer, marketing person etc. you are going to want to align your career with the best driver in the business to increase your own chances of success.
I didn't like him at the time because I'm a Brit and therefore I have a skewed perspective of what we consider to be gentlemanly conduct and when it's appropriate. Incidentally, I felt the same about Senna. However, I can't help but admire their abilities and achievements - even if I preferred to cheer whoever was presented as the underdog (The lionhearted Brit with the best car on the grid, or the plucky quiet Brit with the best car on the grid).
Sport is a contest between the competitors, the rules and the rule enforcers. The winners are the ones who win that contest. Schumacher won more than anyone else.
Being a nice guy is not a contest, nor is it black and white. There is no scoring system to determine whether someone is nicer, kinder, more worthy than another - it's all personal judgement based on what information we are given and what we choose to believe.
In terms of driving standards/ruthlessness I don't think he was any different to Senna really. Both overstepped the mark on occasion, both could then use that on-track forever more as intimidation of their rivals. Sportsmanlike? - not really. Successful? - absolutely. I think Vettel tried to develop in this mold, but people like Webber gave him too much resistance early on so the intimidation never materialised.
Unquestionably, Schumacher had raw speed - probably more than anyone else of his generation. Just look at that Jordan qualifying performance. It was no accident that Benneton poached him and successful people in all fields of F1 continued to gravitate around him. If you're an F1 team manager, designer, engineer, marketing person etc. you are going to want to align your career with the best driver in the business to increase your own chances of success.
I didn't like him at the time because I'm a Brit and therefore I have a skewed perspective of what we consider to be gentlemanly conduct and when it's appropriate. Incidentally, I felt the same about Senna. However, I can't help but admire their abilities and achievements - even if I preferred to cheer whoever was presented as the underdog (The lionhearted Brit with the best car on the grid, or the plucky quiet Brit with the best car on the grid).
Sport is a contest between the competitors, the rules and the rule enforcers. The winners are the ones who win that contest. Schumacher won more than anyone else.
Being a nice guy is not a contest, nor is it black and white. There is no scoring system to determine whether someone is nicer, kinder, more worthy than another - it's all personal judgement based on what information we are given and what we choose to believe.
People often forget that he went from a quick Benetton to a dog of a Ferrari, that required several years of ground up development with significant development input from Schumacher.
Not many reigning WDC's would make such a leap.
His raw speed and development ability was quite special.
Not many reigning WDC's would make such a leap.
His raw speed and development ability was quite special.
Always a great topic although it can get very emotive. What is always at issue is there are almost no impartial observers.
One thing that does seem to be consistent is that to be great, requires single mindedness, to exploit every possible advantage and maximise every opportunity.
When driving they are used to having to go beyond the limit in order to find it. Applying that to other aspects of the sport, or even outside of it, brings obvious ramifications. Some manage to avoid doing this. If you are good enough then they will let you keep your seat even if you do it - if you are not good enough then you are just another danger to be on the track with. This not just F1.
MS pushed the envelope and sometimes went outside it. It hurt him occasionally which is what the FIA should do to discourage gaming the system. But overall he probably gained from it. Given his reputation for always being in control, he and those around him probably did the sums and the results are not to be argued with.
But, as above, he had to first be a special driver, for any of it to make sense.
One thing that does seem to be consistent is that to be great, requires single mindedness, to exploit every possible advantage and maximise every opportunity.
When driving they are used to having to go beyond the limit in order to find it. Applying that to other aspects of the sport, or even outside of it, brings obvious ramifications. Some manage to avoid doing this. If you are good enough then they will let you keep your seat even if you do it - if you are not good enough then you are just another danger to be on the track with. This not just F1.
MS pushed the envelope and sometimes went outside it. It hurt him occasionally which is what the FIA should do to discourage gaming the system. But overall he probably gained from it. Given his reputation for always being in control, he and those around him probably did the sums and the results are not to be argued with.
But, as above, he had to first be a special driver, for any of it to make sense.
Gaz. said:
sparta6 said:
People often forget that he went from a quick Benetton to a dog of a Ferrari, that required several years of ground up development with significant development input from Schumacher.
Not many reigning WDC's would make such a leap.
His raw speed and development ability was quite special.
Even more people forget that Micheal said at the time that the Ferrari was good enough to win a world championship.Not many reigning WDC's would make such a leap.
His raw speed and development ability was quite special.
I had a read through that other M.Schumacher thread and did have a good laugh at a few posters trying to say he wasn't that great in the wet and he was only winning in cars with traction control - that other-worldly annihilation of the field in Spain '96 puts that argument to bed.
While I think you can never judge properly across the different eras of F1 and its evolution I do think Schumacher is one of the greatest to ever drive in F1. He took F1 to a new level, talented obviously, fitter than anyone else, but also he showed how you had to commit 100% to building a team around you to dominate in a sport that changes so quickly. In the time he was at Ferrari he was more often than not at the factory working with the team even on days when there were no driving duties, at GPs he was often the last to retire for the evening, working out how to out fox the competition with his engineers etc. etc. An F1 engineer who worked with both Schumacher and Hamilton said to be a short while ago that if Hamilton had Schumacher's level of 100% dedication to he sport he'd be untouchable, what he lacked in raw talent (which wasn't much) he made up for by working harder than any other driver.So the fact that he had a car tailored to him was fair enough, he put the effort in where others didn't so why not?
He was also able to drive round a car's issues in a way only a few others like Senna, Alonso and Hamilton could and this made him a formidable competitor even in a half decent car. Witness Gerhard Berger's comments on going to Benetton at the end of 1995 having being signed for the 1996 season and hopping in to Schumacher's 1995 WC winning car and declaring 'how did he win a race in this let alone a championship'. People now say the 1996 - 1998 Ferraris weren't that bad and Schumacher's achievements in them weren't all that, but that is nonsense. The 1996 car was a reliability nightmare and not that quick yet three race wins came despite the all conquering Williams being so far ahead. In 1997 and 1998 the car was a lot better but I don't think anyone else on the grid in those seasons would have got it to the last race of the season still in with the chance of a WC. Those were my favourite Schumacher seasons... he drove the wheels off those cars, literally in one qualifying session.
In the rain he was as good as anyone as all the greats are.... Spain 1996 was just awe inspiring as was Spa 1998 until Coulthard's moment of silliness (he now admits that was a low point of his career and I suspect he was told to stay on the racing line by his team, but we will never know).
The elephant in the room is of course his questionable tactics at times. Personally having met the man and finding him charming, interesting and witty I just think that he put so much into winning he felt he would push the rules to the edge and sometimes beyond to ensure he did. For instance at the time the rules didn't say drivers weren't allowed to chop across others at the start so he did. I think Adelaide 1994 was a racing incident despite being British myself and Jerez 1997 he was simply outfoxed by Villeneuve who wouldn't have made the corner had Schumacher not hit him anyway... Villeneuve said himself he could see no way past so decided to go for an impossible overtake and hoped Schumacher would block him enough to allow the cars to contact and him to get past.... exactly what happened and the simmering hatred between them stemmed from that day onwards.... Schumacher felt he had been caught out by his own psychology being exposed and then used by JV.... JV just resented all his subsequent success.
Monaco 2006 quali was a weird one. Of all the incidents hauled up for scrutiny this is the one that baffles me the most. I know from being in the sport a little with my work that Schumacher resented all the talk of how Alonso had taken away his mantle as the best driver in F1 by winning the title in 2005... Schumacher felt he didn't have the tool to put up a proper fight that year due to the tyre situation. By 2006 he wanted his title back and I think Monaco was a race he felt he had to win as now Alonso was challenging him in equal machinery. Hence he had a moment of sheer desperation and tried to make it look like his car had stopped on track..... Rosberg I think remembered this tactic a decade later, but modified it to work a lot better
To be frank my opinion when Schumacher's questionable tactics are brought up is just that he had a will to win most of us can only dream about like Senna and it drives them to do things that are probably close to the limit or beyond in some cases. All this rubbish about him being mentally unstable etc. is just that... rubbish. Senna decided to knock Prost off at the start of the 1990 Japan GP before the race even started, but no one claims he was evil or mentally unstable. These guys just want to win more than you or I can imagine, a lot more.
Schumacher's biggest mistake was coming back in 2010.... I think it has tarnished his reputation to an extent, but I also think he and Rosberg got the best out of the car as it was in those seasons. People seem to deride him for the fact that Rosberg was so close to him across the 3 seasons they had together, but Rosberg was also very close to Hamilton's performance overall and won a WC.... I think Rosberg was a lot better than many are prepared to admit, but to the casual observer Schumacher won no races or WCs and therefore his comeback failed. I do think age played a part and of course he wouldn't have been as hungry as he was 20 years previously.. the whole building a team thing ... not at the age of 40.
So... how to sum up.... well I feel honoured to have seen him drive and that I guess says it all. Having been an F1 fan since 1976 I think he, Senna and Hamilton are the three drivers I would pick that have given me the most pleasure to watch all for slightly different reasons.
No matter what you think of him the way he is now is awful, I wish him all the best.
He was also able to drive round a car's issues in a way only a few others like Senna, Alonso and Hamilton could and this made him a formidable competitor even in a half decent car. Witness Gerhard Berger's comments on going to Benetton at the end of 1995 having being signed for the 1996 season and hopping in to Schumacher's 1995 WC winning car and declaring 'how did he win a race in this let alone a championship'. People now say the 1996 - 1998 Ferraris weren't that bad and Schumacher's achievements in them weren't all that, but that is nonsense. The 1996 car was a reliability nightmare and not that quick yet three race wins came despite the all conquering Williams being so far ahead. In 1997 and 1998 the car was a lot better but I don't think anyone else on the grid in those seasons would have got it to the last race of the season still in with the chance of a WC. Those were my favourite Schumacher seasons... he drove the wheels off those cars, literally in one qualifying session.
In the rain he was as good as anyone as all the greats are.... Spain 1996 was just awe inspiring as was Spa 1998 until Coulthard's moment of silliness (he now admits that was a low point of his career and I suspect he was told to stay on the racing line by his team, but we will never know).
The elephant in the room is of course his questionable tactics at times. Personally having met the man and finding him charming, interesting and witty I just think that he put so much into winning he felt he would push the rules to the edge and sometimes beyond to ensure he did. For instance at the time the rules didn't say drivers weren't allowed to chop across others at the start so he did. I think Adelaide 1994 was a racing incident despite being British myself and Jerez 1997 he was simply outfoxed by Villeneuve who wouldn't have made the corner had Schumacher not hit him anyway... Villeneuve said himself he could see no way past so decided to go for an impossible overtake and hoped Schumacher would block him enough to allow the cars to contact and him to get past.... exactly what happened and the simmering hatred between them stemmed from that day onwards.... Schumacher felt he had been caught out by his own psychology being exposed and then used by JV.... JV just resented all his subsequent success.
Monaco 2006 quali was a weird one. Of all the incidents hauled up for scrutiny this is the one that baffles me the most. I know from being in the sport a little with my work that Schumacher resented all the talk of how Alonso had taken away his mantle as the best driver in F1 by winning the title in 2005... Schumacher felt he didn't have the tool to put up a proper fight that year due to the tyre situation. By 2006 he wanted his title back and I think Monaco was a race he felt he had to win as now Alonso was challenging him in equal machinery. Hence he had a moment of sheer desperation and tried to make it look like his car had stopped on track..... Rosberg I think remembered this tactic a decade later, but modified it to work a lot better
To be frank my opinion when Schumacher's questionable tactics are brought up is just that he had a will to win most of us can only dream about like Senna and it drives them to do things that are probably close to the limit or beyond in some cases. All this rubbish about him being mentally unstable etc. is just that... rubbish. Senna decided to knock Prost off at the start of the 1990 Japan GP before the race even started, but no one claims he was evil or mentally unstable. These guys just want to win more than you or I can imagine, a lot more.
Schumacher's biggest mistake was coming back in 2010.... I think it has tarnished his reputation to an extent, but I also think he and Rosberg got the best out of the car as it was in those seasons. People seem to deride him for the fact that Rosberg was so close to him across the 3 seasons they had together, but Rosberg was also very close to Hamilton's performance overall and won a WC.... I think Rosberg was a lot better than many are prepared to admit, but to the casual observer Schumacher won no races or WCs and therefore his comeback failed. I do think age played a part and of course he wouldn't have been as hungry as he was 20 years previously.. the whole building a team thing ... not at the age of 40.
So... how to sum up.... well I feel honoured to have seen him drive and that I guess says it all. Having been an F1 fan since 1976 I think he, Senna and Hamilton are the three drivers I would pick that have given me the most pleasure to watch all for slightly different reasons.
No matter what you think of him the way he is now is awful, I wish him all the best.
Excellent post CB, however, for me MS pushed too far too often and therefore tarnishes my view of him. Senna also had that totally ruthless streak. MS was so far ahead of the other drivers I do not believe he needed to 'bend' the rules to be a true great. Senna, Prost, Schumacher and Hamilton stand out to me as the best drivers during the 40-odd years I have been watching F1.
Not a fan which is a shame given his talent. For me the issue was always around Ferrari and MS not running a "fair" team using the 2nd driver to help MS win and essentially be a battering ram. Team orders and using the 2nd driver to assist just one driver is never right imo. I guess anyone in MS's shoes would be happy with the set up as it kept getting him wins, so maybe not his fault. I still see Ferrari doing the same thing today. It just soured my opinion of MS. As for Ferrari I simply wouldn't ever buy one because for me they have been big part of ruining F1 and still are.. but just my opinion!
I didn’t like him, just to get that out of the way.
But now and again, in every sport, someone comes along to move things forward. He was one of those people.
His personal fitness was way ahead of his competitors - I believe he had a resting heart rate in the 40s at his peak.
This gave him the ability to pump in qualifying levels of effort lap after lap. Together with Braun they virtually invented the undercut tactic.
Combine all that with innovative driving
technique, great skill and self confidence and you have the perfect F1 driver.
Now all F1 drivers are built that way.
But now and again, in every sport, someone comes along to move things forward. He was one of those people.
His personal fitness was way ahead of his competitors - I believe he had a resting heart rate in the 40s at his peak.
This gave him the ability to pump in qualifying levels of effort lap after lap. Together with Braun they virtually invented the undercut tactic.
Combine all that with innovative driving
technique, great skill and self confidence and you have the perfect F1 driver.
Now all F1 drivers are built that way.
fantastic driver, should be defacto greatest in everyone's top 5, that he isn't says it all
minus points...
crossed over the sportsmanship line far too often & anyone who thinks '94 Adelaide was a racing incident needs to give their head a wobble
'97 blatant
'06 blatant
'10 blatant
lucky that the 2 most gifted competitors he ever faced either died (Senna) or nearly died (Mika Häkkinen, who was never the same driver again post '95 ...even as a subsequent x2 WDC)
Had Flavio's helping 'hand' at Benetton (convicted cheat)
Had Bernie's helping 'hand' like everyone else at Ferrari whilst under Bernie's watch (admitted to, by Bernie himself)
never had a decent team mate in his pomp to be compared against ...& Nico (who i rate highly) spanked him
thus, not even in my top 5
minus points...
crossed over the sportsmanship line far too often & anyone who thinks '94 Adelaide was a racing incident needs to give their head a wobble
'97 blatant
'06 blatant
'10 blatant
lucky that the 2 most gifted competitors he ever faced either died (Senna) or nearly died (Mika Häkkinen, who was never the same driver again post '95 ...even as a subsequent x2 WDC)
Had Flavio's helping 'hand' at Benetton (convicted cheat)
Had Bernie's helping 'hand' like everyone else at Ferrari whilst under Bernie's watch (admitted to, by Bernie himself)
never had a decent team mate in his pomp to be compared against ...& Nico (who i rate highly) spanked him
thus, not even in my top 5
When the cars became easier to drive he lost his advantage over the others imo. The way he controlled a car always amazed me. If you can excuse the bad quality this short vid is worth a watch, it has actual telemetry from his Benetton.
https://youtu.be/Uk2p2nRK-p4
This says similar too
https://youtu.be/TOhgI1hQA68
Dunc
https://youtu.be/Uk2p2nRK-p4
This says similar too
https://youtu.be/TOhgI1hQA68
Dunc
Edited by dunc_sx on Thursday 23 August 23:22
The Benetton in 1995 was undriveable according to Alesi and Berger and it was a complete dog at the start of the year then gradually improved. The Williams was so far ahead at the start it's silly.
The Ferrari in 1996 was appalling and 1997 didn't start off much better but Michael drove around them both.
I don't think anyone that wins 7 WDC's and 5 in a row can be anything less than one of the very best, regardless of individual circumstances like having a team built around him or his questionable tactics to win.
He's one of the best ever and it's a start state of affairs that he's currently the way he is to boot.
The Ferrari in 1996 was appalling and 1997 didn't start off much better but Michael drove around them both.
I don't think anyone that wins 7 WDC's and 5 in a row can be anything less than one of the very best, regardless of individual circumstances like having a team built around him or his questionable tactics to win.
He's one of the best ever and it's a start state of affairs that he's currently the way he is to boot.
Anyone who compares his time at Mercedes with Nico R needs their head examined - he was 40-43 years old then and well past it. But even being well over-the-hill and a few tenths slower than his prime, he still managed to set the quickest time in 2012 Monaco qualifying...
How can he not be in anyone's all time top-five?
How can he not be in anyone's all time top-five?
Genius behind the wheel, but more importantly in the board room....should always be classed as the greatest, but he can’t IMHO
He will always have the clouds hanging over his head from illegal traction control in the Benetton, taking out hill, Villeneuve, the park job at Monaco, multiple team orders with barichello and others, dodgy bargeboards and flexible wings (funny how they weren’t disqualified from those races).
I’ve no doubt he deserves to be around the top drivers based on talent, but I wish we all knew just how good he was without the above indescresions getting in the way.
He will always have the clouds hanging over his head from illegal traction control in the Benetton, taking out hill, Villeneuve, the park job at Monaco, multiple team orders with barichello and others, dodgy bargeboards and flexible wings (funny how they weren’t disqualified from those races).
I’ve no doubt he deserves to be around the top drivers based on talent, but I wish we all knew just how good he was without the above indescresions getting in the way.
angrymoby said:
fantastic driver, should be defacto greatest in everyone's top 5, that he isn't says it all
anyone who thinks '94 Adelaide was a racing incident needs to give their head a wobble
Very much this, some of his blatant "cheats" beggar belief.anyone who thinks '94 Adelaide was a racing incident needs to give their head a wobble
BUT Adelaide '94 was soo far over the line I'm amazed he wasn't banned or striped of points.
FeelingLucky said:
angrymoby said:
fantastic driver, should be defacto greatest in everyone's top 5, that he isn't says it all
anyone who thinks '94 Adelaide was a racing incident needs to give their head a wobble
Very much this, some of his blatant "cheats" beggar belief.anyone who thinks '94 Adelaide was a racing incident needs to give their head a wobble
BUT Adelaide '94 was soo far over the line I'm amazed he wasn't banned or striped of points.
The FIA had spent the 1994 season after Senna's death trying to engineer a Williams WC and they had an issue with Briatore over the safety changes and his criticism of them, if they had thought there was anyway they could DQ Schumacher on pre-meditated collision grounds they would have done so in a heartbeat... I'm surprised they didn't anyway after the Spa GP nonsense.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 24th August 08:47
cb1965 said:
Because unlike 1997 it was a racing incident.
The FIA had spent the 1994 season after Senna's death trying to engineer a Williams WC and they had an issue with Briatore over the safety changes and his criticism of them, if they had thought there was anyway they could DQ Schumacher on pre-meditated collision grounds they would have done so in a heartbeat... I'm surprised they didn't anyway after the Spa GP nonsense.
Was it heck ...if you believe what Brawn say's about him & his extra mental capacity, then he would have known exactly what he needed to do at the time, let alone the amount of mental chess he'd have done before he'd even stepped into the car, calculating every possible outcomeThe FIA had spent the 1994 season after Senna's death trying to engineer a Williams WC and they had an issue with Briatore over the safety changes and his criticism of them, if they had thought there was anyway they could DQ Schumacher on pre-meditated collision grounds they would have done so in a heartbeat... I'm surprised they didn't anyway after the Spa GP nonsense.
Edited by cb1965 on Friday 24th August 08:47
He clattered the wall hard, he knew his car was knackered & from that point onwards he knew he was going to DNF ...that's why what he did subsequently makes it so bad ...he even left the door open extra wide- an absolute
s trickangrymoby said:
cb1965 said:
Because unlike 1997 it was a racing incident.
The FIA had spent the 1994 season after Senna's death trying to engineer a Williams WC and they had an issue with Briatore over the safety changes and his criticism of them, if they had thought there was anyway they could DQ Schumacher on pre-meditated collision grounds they would have done so in a heartbeat... I'm surprised they didn't anyway after the Spa GP nonsense.
Was it heck ...if you believe what Brawn say's about him & his extra mental capacity, then he would have known exactly what he needed to do at the time, let alone the amount of mental chess he'd have done before he'd even stepped into the car, calculating every possible outcomeThe FIA had spent the 1994 season after Senna's death trying to engineer a Williams WC and they had an issue with Briatore over the safety changes and his criticism of them, if they had thought there was anyway they could DQ Schumacher on pre-meditated collision grounds they would have done so in a heartbeat... I'm surprised they didn't anyway after the Spa GP nonsense.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 24th August 08:47
He clattered the wall hard, he knew his car was knackered & from that point onwards he knew he was going to DNF ...that's why what he did subsequently makes it so bad ...he even left the door open extra wide- an absolute
s trickGassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff