Lewis Hamilton Vs Michael Schumacher - Who Is Better?

Lewis Hamilton Vs Michael Schumacher - Who Is Better?

Author
Discussion

DOCG

72 posts

1 month

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Mr Tidy said:
No, he wasn't - he couldn't get near enough to any rivals to punt them off the track in his come back! (Cheating b*stard). banghead

He regularly got beaten by Nico Rosberg FFS, who in turn got put right back into his place when Lewis arrived - albeit with a slip up one season sadly.

Lewis would have nailed MS, or at least avoided MS' desperate lunges.

There's racing, and there's crashing - as Senna fans should know. laugh
Rosberg was not that far behind Hamilton, in 2 of the 3 dominant seasons together the championship went to the final round.

Although I must say your blind hatred of MSC prevents you from looking at it objectively.

DOCG

72 posts

1 month

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
LaurasOtherHalf said:
It's pointless comparing drivers from different eras but it's plain to see both SCH and HAM are up there with the all time greats. As you simply can't compare them it all goes down to semantics, I personally prefer HAM as his racing is fairer, he's never knowingly cheated and man-child that he is, I genuinely like the bloke.

I get a lot of other's don't, obviously a lot is latent racism or a dislike of people who wear spangly trousers, speak with a mid Atlantic accent or have a haircut that doesn't go down too well at boarding school in the 1970s. Horses for courses.

One thing I would like to add that I do love about HAM is (in simplistic terms) is he is a combination of the two best types of F1 driver-let's say a Senna and a Prost. The natural speed and the analytical thinker. We'll never know whether Senna would have adopted the other style completely in the face of Schumacher's ascendancy but Hamilton is the complete driver at present. His performances over the last three seasons have been peerless.

If VER and LEC improve slightly and HAM's one lap pace deteriorates with age fractionally HAM may even lose his natural advantage but would anyone think he would still be easily beatable in top machinery?
I never thought I'd see someone bother to write propaganda about an F1 driver.

angrymoby

1,018 posts

125 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
TobyTR said:
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....
'agenda'? how old are you? ...you post like a 10 year old

TobyTR said:
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.
again, what is your point? ...we all know Schumacher was better than Barrichello (Button was better than Barrichello )

the point you missed is that A44RON included 2000 as one of Schumachers 'wilderness' years- winning a WDC is clearly not a wilderness or poor year

TobyTR said:
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.
nope & nope

lets take the 'lesser' Ferrari driver in '97 & podiums- Eddie (inc x4 crashes) 5, Berger 3, Alesi 5 podiums

& the reason Eddie didn't pick up more points when on the podium? Michael was in front of him (x4 Ferrari double podiums)

onto Autosport & their video ...can you give me the time stamp for where they 'clearly' say "the 96 and 97 cars were similar in pace to the Williams" because not only have you appeared to have made that up, it also undoes your argument somewhat

the only times they mention relative pace to other cars is that the F310 & F310B had similar pace deficit to the Williams (no mention of other cars ...so you seem to have made that up too)

& the other time is the F-2006 248 F1 which they clearly say was 'fastest car on pace' ...but lost out to Alonso (which you dont mention- lol)

not that that vid is to be taken that seriously as a. they're not ranking cars against all 'other' cars per season (just against the top car that year & Michaels performance in/ against them- otherwise it would be a bit of long video)

& b. the Jordan (which he had 1 race - zero podiums) is 13th ...having a bit of a leg pull of Autosport contributor Gary Anderson i feel

Edited by angrymoby on Tuesday 5th November 12:52

HustleRussell

17,081 posts

107 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
Rosberg was not that far behind Hamilton, in 2 of the 3 dominant seasons together the championship went to the final round.
(One of those two only because of double points)

LaurasOtherHalf

15,812 posts

143 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
I never thought I'd see someone bother to write propaganda about an F1 driver.
Propaganda? hehe Ok...

Rather than taking pot shots at people's posts on a forum you joined a matter of weeks ago, why don't you try and change our mind with some reasoned debate on why you think Schumacher was indeed better? How old are you, early 20s? You must have done some serious research on the subject as most of what you're talking about happened when you were a child-so enthral us with your expertise thumbup

Edited by LaurasOtherHalf on Tuesday 5th November 13:22

Graveworm

2,644 posts

18 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
There is not evidence that teams do believe that driver skill plays a large factor, marketing is just as big a reason as to what drivers a team will want to acquire. Ferrari were very keen to keep Massa until 2014 because their major sponsor (Santander) was expanding into Brazilian market at the time.

As for Brown and Lauda, they were luring the most marketable driver on the grid; British, media friendly, a good brand for Mercedes to associate themselves with.
Santander has been in Brazil since 97 Ferrari approached Rosberg to replace Massa in 2012 but apart from that spot on.

How on earth do you think you are the only one who knows this? Yes small teams need to sell seats but Manufacturer teams need to be winning races as that's what sells the cars.

vdn

6,910 posts

150 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Yes, Hamilton’s phenomenal rise through the ranks is irrelevant.

They could have just signed anyone, for marketing purposes. Lauda pursued Lewis for Mercedes marketing purposes apparently.

rolleyes

There’s some real thicko’s about; I can’t believe some people actually watch F1 and think these things. I also think there’s a lot of naivety toward lower formulae also... and driver successes pre F1.

37chevy

3,203 posts

103 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
vdn said:
Yes, Hamilton’s phenomenal rise through the ranks is irrelevant.

They could have just signed anyone, for marketing purposes. Lauda pursued Lewis for Mercedes marketing purposes apparently.

rolleyes

There’s some real thicko’s about; I can’t believe some people actually watch F1 and think these things. I also think there’s a lot of naivety toward lower formulae also... and driver successes pre F1.
indeed..if they wanted a driver for pure marketing value then surely Alex Yoong would have been a perfect tie In with Petronas...he could partner Scott Speed who would be a great tie in for IWC

Mr. White

323 posts

51 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
If Hamilton had 1) number 1 status and 2) a team that pitted him one lap earlier in China 2007, he would already be on 8 titles.

Yes, he's better than Schumacher.

vdn

6,910 posts

150 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Mr. White said:
If Hamilton had 1) number 1 status and 2) a team that pitted him one lap earlier in China 2007, he would already be on 8 titles.

Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
yes

paulguitar

3,794 posts

60 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Mr. White said:
If Hamilton had 1) number 1 status and 2) a team that pitted him one lap earlier in China 2007, he would already be on 8 titles.

Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
I certainly think that is accurate. If Hamilton had anything like the set-up that Schumacher had he'd be miles ahead already.



DOCG

72 posts

1 month

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Propaganda? hehe Ok...

Rather than taking pot shots at people's posts on a forum you joined a matter of weeks ago, why don't you try and change our mind with some reasoned debate on why you think Schumacher was indeed better? How old are you, early 20s? You must have done some serious research on the subject as most of what you're talking about happened when you were a child-so enthral us with your expertise thumbup

Edited by LaurasOtherHalf on Tuesday 5th November 13:22
I don't think Schumacher was a better driver. As I showed in my previous posts, it is impossible to tell either way because the differences are so small compared to the other factors in determining success.

DOCG

72 posts

1 month

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Graveworm said:
Santander has been in Brazil since 97 Ferrari approached Rosberg to replace Massa in 2012 but apart from that spot on.

How on earth do you think you are the only one who knows this? Yes small teams need to sell seats but Manufacturer teams need to be winning races as that's what sells the cars.
I am not the only one who knows it, but everyone else underestimates the impact it has on driver selection.

paulguitar

3,794 posts

60 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
I don't think Schumacher was a better driver. As I showed in my previous posts, it is impossible to tell either way because the differences are so small compared to the other factors in determining success.
In this era, the differences are indeed small, but there ARE differences.

It's certainly not 'impossible to tell either way', and actually, we have some called the world drivers championship which helps us with this...

DOCG

72 posts

1 month

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Mr. White said:
If Hamilton had 1) number 1 status and 2) a team that pitted him one lap earlier in China 2007, he would already be on 8 titles.

Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
I used to think that titles determined who was the best driver, when I was a child.

And if he didn't join Mercedes he would only have one championship. Things could have always turned out a different way, it doesn't prove anything.

On a different point, China 2007 was the only time I ever saw a team force their driver to stay-out until the tyre was worn to the canvas. Peculiar. And then the gearbox "malfunction" in Brazil that magically fixed itself after Hamilton was overtaken by the entire field.

Edited by DOCG on Tuesday 5th November 15:02

paulguitar

3,794 posts

60 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
Halmyre said:
Brabham designer Ron Tauranac once said the best thing about the Lotus is Jim Clark; looking at the statistics for Clark's team mates Trevor Taylor, Peter Arundell and Mike Spence, you have to agree.
I wouldn't for a moment question Clark's greatness, but that is not exactly a roll-call of legendary teammates.






DOCG

72 posts

1 month

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
In this era, the differences are indeed small, but there ARE differences.

It's certainly not 'impossible to tell either way', and actually, we have some called the world drivers championship which helps us with this...
Yes, but driver difference is one of minor determinants of success. The difference between our opinions is that I probably believe the differences are a lot smaller than you do.

HardtopManual

1,249 posts

113 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
I used to think that titles determined who was the best driver, when I was a child.
As the FIA are obviously using the wrong measure, what does determine who is the best driver?

Graveworm

2,644 posts

18 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
Graveworm said:
Santander has been in Brazil since 97 Ferrari approached Rosberg to replace Massa in 2012 but apart from that spot on.

How on earth do you think you are the only one who knows this? Yes small teams need to sell seats but Manufacturer teams need to be winning races as that's what sells the cars.
I am not the only one who knows it, but everyone else underestimates the impact it has on driver selection.
Very occasionally being alone going against the traffic is a sign of true genius, but nearly always it's because they are driving the wrong direction.
Given it looks like you may be mistaken with your Massa theory, maybe you might want to check your bearings?
What additional marketing did Albon bring over Gasly, and why does his boss seem to think it is his driving that will decide whether he drives next year.
Kimi Raikkonen is one of the most popular drivers and an ex WDC but Ferrari let him go. They said it was because he was not competitive enough must have just been an excuse, as that doesn't matter.

37chevy

3,203 posts

103 months

Tuesday 5th November
quotequote all
DOCG said:
Mr. White said:
If Hamilton had 1) number 1 status and 2) a team that pitted him one lap earlier in China 2007, he would already be on 8 titles.

Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
I used to think that titles determined who was the best driver, when I was a child.

Edited by DOCG on Tuesday 5th November 15:02
So then why bother race at all? If championships aren’t a test of how good a driver, neither are wins...and if they aren’t a test then what’s the point in getting into F1....hell the natural conclusion is that YOUR’E a better driver than Hamilton...I mean we’ve got no way of proving otherwise, right?