Lewis Hamilton Vs Michael Schumacher - Who Is Better?

[37chevy]

DOCG said:

It is impossible to know whether they were the best drivers or not. All we know is that they had the best combination of driving talent and equipment. I am not not going to pointlessly say that driver X is better than driver Y because of more wins, championships, poles or any other statistic because it just isn't a representation of driver skill, it only proves the opportunity they had.

....and how do you think they got that opportunity? By being the worst driver on the grid?

[DOCG]

37chevy said:

....and how do you think they got that opportunity? By being the worst driver on the grid?

In the case of Hamilton and Schumacher, they both went to teams that happened to become the most dominant in the sport. Same reason that career midfield drivers like Rosberg and Webber managed to get themselves into championship winning positions, they happened to be in teams that became very dominant.

Edited by DOCG on Sunday 3rd November 19:23

[Graveworm]

DOCG said:

In the case of Hamilton and Schumacher, they both went to teams that happened to become the most dominant in the sport. Same reason that career midfield drivers like Rosberg and Webber managed to get themselves into championship winning positions, they happened to be in teams that became very dominant.

Edited by DOCG on Sunday 3rd November 19:23

A bit like people who "Just happen" to buy the shares that go up. They did not start in F1. In most cases they got that chance by beating drivers in equal cars and or being faster in practice.

Edited by Graveworm on Sunday 3rd November 21:20

[37chevy]

DOCG said:

In the case of Hamilton and Schumacher, they both went to teams that happened to become the most dominant in the sport. Same reason that career midfield drivers like Rosberg and Webber managed to get themselves into championship winning positions, they happened to be in teams that became very dominant.

Edited by DOCG on Sunday 3rd November 19:23

You missed about a decade of their careers before that....there’s a reason they got top drives, they earned it

[TobyTR]

angrymoby said:

A44RON said:

that essentially sums it up. F1 page on facebook shows this in a moving timeline graph; Schumacher was still winning more races 1996-2000 than Hamilton was 2009-2013, despite Schumacher missing half of the 1999 season with a broken leg.

& this sums up the one-eye'ness of some of the Schumacher fans...

A44RON has included the 2000 / F1-2000- a WDC/ WCC winning car that had 21 podiums & rated as the 5th best car that Schumacher ever drove (according to the experts/ journalists at Autosport ...& 6 isn't half of 16 either)

Edited by angrymoby on Sunday 3rd November 17:31

Ooh, so now you agree with the Autosport video because you're trying to make it fit your own agenda. Now there's a surprise....

comparing Schumacher's cars of 1996-2000 and Hamilton's cars from 2009-2013 still has Hamilton having the better cars (Button finishing runner-up in 2011 in case you forgotten), Schumacher missed half of 1999 with a broken leg and yet that graph STILL shows Schumacer winning/achieving more during those 5 seasons. Schumacher 74 races vs Hamilton 94 races over the same period; Schumacher 25 wins/45 podiums vs Hamilton 13 wins/32 podiums. Ouch.

And the 2000 Ferrari had 21 podiums, while the 2000 McLaren had 22 podiums and Coulthard finished 11 points ahead of Barrichello with two more wins than the Brazilian. Again, Schumacher making the difference that year.

So to recap:

1. The Ferrari F310B of '97 was not the second-best car that year, as proven by the stats and the Autosport video that you disagreed with at first and now agree with; they clearly say "the 96 and 97 cars were similar in pace to the Williams" - well the 96 car wasn't the second best that year either and the McLaren was improved for '97. To be employed as a journalist at Autosport you have to know what you're talking about - more than any of us armchair warriors on here. Same with the bbc F1 articles I've been sharing and you're conveniently ignoring along with the other biased Hamilton lovers.

2. "Schumacher had number one status, Lewis had equal status." - and yet 2011 Button finished runner-up with equal status - such a disadvantage!

3. Hamilton had the second-best car in 2013 and finished 4th in the WDC, behind a driver with an inferior car who was qualifying behind him but overtaking him and finishing ahead.

4. from a very good well-informed F1 driver who has raced against both and beaten one of them:

Edited by TobyTR on Monday 4th November 01:01

[TobyTR]

mattikake said:

But anyway; YES!

You've resorted to insults in lieu of the very evidence you say you have.

You know what this means? Cognitive dissonance - You've lost. You only semi-consciously know it. You won't accept it. And it hurts. The result? Emotional outburst of a confused mind. (Seriously, look it up)

And no, cognitive dissonance is not an implication that you're stupid. Not yet anyway.

My job here is done.

Well comparing a post-retired Michael Schumacher who came back and raced a 27-year-old Lewis Hamilton doesn't do you any favours. Lets see if Hamilton comes out of retirement 41-43 years old and races Verstappen.

I haven't lost anything, see my post above I'm still the only one here backing my posts up with evidence while you continue to regurgitate the same incorrect nonsense like vdn and the other biased Schumacher haters. It's great fun.

Cognitive dissonance: "the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change. It refers to a situation where someone's behaviour conflicts with their beliefs or attitudes. For example, when people smoke even though they know it's pretty bad for them, they experience cognitive dissonance." I've been the opposite actually and very consistent.

[95 fiesta si]

There both Legends.

Cant compare, different cars, different time, different rules, different regulations, different points in a race, different amount of races in a season etc...the list goes on.

IMO one isnt better then the other, they are the best of the best from there generation. Schumacher still holds the most wins and titles so goes down in the books as the most successful.....for now

[heebeegeetee]

95 fiesta si said:

There both Legends.

Cant compare, different cars, different time, different rules, different regulations, different points in a race, different amount of races in a season etc...the list goes on.

IMO one isnt better then the other, they are the best of the best from there generation. Schumacher still holds the most wins and titles so goes down in the books as the most successful.....for now

No, you can compare, you absolutely can compare how the two respective drivers went about their sport.

Firstly, one driver has a superb record on his path to F1 and the other doesn’t. Second, one driver has, in my opinion, been pretty exemplary in how he went about his sport and the other was pretty much the polar opposite.

I know which I prefer, I believe I know which approach most people would prefer, I know which legacy I would far prefer.

And I think TobyTr is wrong - these things DO matter, to the fans and possibly even to their respective families. These things will be written about for decades to come.

[DOCG]

37chevy said:

You missed about a decade of their careers before that....there’s a reason they got top drives, they earned it

It proves that career midfield driver can compete for a championship if put in the best car, you could and Button to that group as well.

The fact that a midfield driver like Rosberg managed to beat a declared "legend" in Hamilton proves that the difference in driver skill is so immeasurably small that it is one of the least relevant factors in determining career success.

[paulguitar]

DOCG said:

the difference in driver skill is so immeasurably small that it is one of the least relevant factors in determining career success.

Perhaps you should get a job advising the team managers. Mercedes could save many millions by simply employing a cheaper driver, it won't make much difference.

[Graveworm]

DOCG said:

It proves that career midfield driver can compete for a championship if put in the best car, you could and Button to that group as well.

The fact that a midfield driver like Rosberg managed to beat a declared "legend" in Hamilton proves that the difference in driver skill is so immeasurably small that it is one of the least relevant factors in determining career success.

It's true if the car keeps breaking down, or they are prevented from driving it, then the driver may not be able to win.
But you keep ignoring that driving skill is what gets you in the best car, then you still need be better than others in the same machinery.
Given the title of this thread it may be relevant that career midfield driver Rosberg comfortably beat Schumacher and Ferrari wanted him to replace Massa?

Edited by Graveworm on Monday 4th November 13:07

[heebeegeetee]

DOCG said:

It proves that career midfield driver can compete for a championship if put in the best car, you could and Button to that group as well.

The fact that a midfield driver like Rosberg managed to beat a declared "legend" in Hamilton proves that the difference in driver skill is so immeasurably small that it is one of the least relevant factors in determining career success.

Wow.

Clearly, all those team bosses, who put time, effort and one heck of a lot of money in securing the best drivers, have been doing it wrong for about 100 years.

[sparta6]

Since 2014 Brackley F1 has certainly delivered for Hamilton and Rosberg. Perhaps Bottas is next ?

Not sure that the hybrid lockout and zero in-season testing is good for F1 though !

[37chevy]

sparta6 said:

Since 2014 Brackley F1 has certainly delivered for Hamilton and Rosberg. Perhaps Bottas is next ?

Not sure that the hybrid lockout and zero in-season testing is good for F1 though !

its amazing how Maranello F1 delivered for Schumacher too 2000-2004 and Milton Keynes F1 for Vettel 2010-2013

[Deesee]

sparta6 said:

Since 2014 Brackley F1 has certainly delivered for Hamilton and Rosberg. Perhaps Bottas is next ?

Not sure that the hybrid lockout and zero in-season testing is good for F1 though !

Some interesting information here.

Senna *h*t or bust led to win
Prosts one lap pace (race)
Kimis seeming reliability issues (early years for these fastest laps)? How many more wins/WDC?
MSC hat tricks, refuelling would not be the whole answer here, especially when Quali on race start fuel, stand out stat for me.

[DOCG]

paulguitar said:

Perhaps you should get a job advising the team managers. Mercedes could save many millions by simply employing a cheaper driver, it won't make much difference.

In terms of team success, yes. But I don't underestimate the value of marketing and sponsorship, I am sure that Hamilton is great for these.

[DOCG]

heebeegeetee said:

Wow.

Clearly, all those team bosses, who put time, effort and one heck of a lot of money in securing the best drivers, have been doing it wrong for about 100 years.

In the past it would have made a much bigger difference, but the pool of drivers is a lot larger now that the top drivers are a lot closer in terms of ability. And in this context "top drivers" probably includes more drivers than there are seats on the F1 grid.

[37chevy]

DOCG said:

paulguitar said:

Perhaps you should get a job advising the team managers. Mercedes could save many millions by simply employing a cheaper driver, it won't make much difference.

In terms of team success, yes. But I don't underestimate the value of marketing and sponsorship, I am sure that Hamilton is great for these.

Huh and guess who put himself in a position and works hard for his team and sponsors...ahhh yes that would be hamilton.

So....quick on the track and a corporate jizz fest...that’s how you become great.

[DOCG]

37chevy said:

Huh and guess who put himself in a position and works hard for his team and sponsors...ahhh yes that would be hamilton.

So....quick on the track and a corporate jizz fest...that’s how you become great.

The fact that you use such vulgar and disgusting words as "jizz fest" on a public forum really does make you look bad.

[DOCG]

Graveworm said:

It's true if the car keeps breaking down, or they are prevented from driving it, then the driver may not be able to win.
But you keep ignoring that driving skill is what gets you in the best car, then you still need be better than others in the same machinery.
Given the title of this thread it may be relevant that career midfield driver Rosberg comfortably beat Schumacher and Ferrari wanted him to replace Massa?

Edited by Graveworm on Monday 4th November 13:07

I'm not ignoring it, I don't believe it is true. The drivers of the best cars are only perceived to be the best, it doesn't mean that they really are.

Schumacher was past age 40 at that point, you can't expect someone to remain at their prior level at that age considering how athletic F1 drivers need to be.