Lewis Hamilton Vs Michael Schumacher - Who Is Better?
Discussion
DOCG said:
I never thought I'd see someone bother to write propaganda about an F1 driver.
Propaganda? 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
Edited by LaurasOtherHalf on Tuesday 5th November 13:22
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
They could have just signed anyone, for marketing purposes. Lauda pursued Lewis for Mercedes marketing purposes apparently.
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.
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.
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 IWCThey could have just signed anyone, for marketing purposes. Lauda pursued Lewis for Mercedes marketing purposes apparently.
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.
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.Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Propaganda? 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
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. 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
Edited by LaurasOtherHalf on Tuesday 5th November 13:22
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. 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.
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...
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. Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
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
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.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. 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 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. 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.
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.
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. Yes, he's better than Schumacher.
Edited by DOCG on Tuesday 5th November 15:02
Graveworm said:
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.
What was wrong about the Massa theory? Santander invested heavily into Brazil in 2011 Source: https://www.santander.co.uk/assets/s3fs-public/doc...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.
I don't deny that drivers deteriorate as they get older.
Sorry, it was in 2009 that Santander invested heavily in the Brazilian market: https://www.ft.com/content/1ff753e6-7bbc-11de-9772...
"Santander chief executive Emilio Botín has identified the bank’s Brazilian operations as key to the bank’s strategy, and revealed plans last year for it to become the most profitable listed bank in the country."
"Santander chief executive Emilio Botín has identified the bank’s Brazilian operations as key to the bank’s strategy, and revealed plans last year for it to become the most profitable listed bank in the country."
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff