| donjuan | 04-27-2004 12:44 PM |
Is Schumacher's dominance good for F1?
�
�
Some say yes, some no. Discuss.
| HoRo1 | 04-27-2004 12:50 PM |
I voted yes, but in reality it doesn't matter.
It gives the other teams something to aim at. BAR seems to be answering the challenge.
It gives the other teams something to aim at. BAR seems to be answering the challenge.
| gtguy | 04-27-2004 01:08 PM |
He's the best. He should be dominant. It could be argued that Barrichello's performance is Ferrari reality.
Paddock wags have always said that Schumacher is worth almost a second a lap. Certainly, he is on form this year. Rory Byrne (who should know) said that Schumacher is driving as well as he has ever been, which is pretty scary.
Is Schumacher's dominance good for F1? Yes, for many reasons.
1. It gives people someone to hate. Were he not German, we he say, Brazilian, he would be revered and nobody would be uttering a word. The fact is that the mostly British motoring press, for the most part, still haven't forgiven Schumacher for 1994's incident with Damon Hill. :lol: Talk about F1 Decade! :lol:
2. It gives the other teams something to shoot for.
3. He is a personality, and a star. Every sport needs that. Look at how crappy the post-Jordan NBA is for evidence.
4. He sets a standard. Six championships, probably seven, barring anything unforseen...excellence is impressive, and intimidating.
Now, are people finding that metronomic dominance boring? Some might, and it's their loss if that's so. We aren't going to see anything like this in our lifetimes, I'd wager. Think back to when Schumacher first signed with Ferrari, and how crappy that car was. Now look at today, and the effect that he has had on the team. It's absolutely thrilling.
Kevin
Paddock wags have always said that Schumacher is worth almost a second a lap. Certainly, he is on form this year. Rory Byrne (who should know) said that Schumacher is driving as well as he has ever been, which is pretty scary.
Is Schumacher's dominance good for F1? Yes, for many reasons.
1. It gives people someone to hate. Were he not German, we he say, Brazilian, he would be revered and nobody would be uttering a word. The fact is that the mostly British motoring press, for the most part, still haven't forgiven Schumacher for 1994's incident with Damon Hill. :lol: Talk about F1 Decade! :lol:
2. It gives the other teams something to shoot for.
3. He is a personality, and a star. Every sport needs that. Look at how crappy the post-Jordan NBA is for evidence.
4. He sets a standard. Six championships, probably seven, barring anything unforseen...excellence is impressive, and intimidating.
Now, are people finding that metronomic dominance boring? Some might, and it's their loss if that's so. We aren't going to see anything like this in our lifetimes, I'd wager. Think back to when Schumacher first signed with Ferrari, and how crappy that car was. Now look at today, and the effect that he has had on the team. It's absolutely thrilling.
Kevin
| Lightning Jack | 04-27-2004 01:41 PM |
yes.. any u can't do anything about it
| BriDrive | 04-27-2004 01:47 PM |
Yes, it is good.....it would be better, spectacular even, had he shifted to another team after 2~3 WC's w/ Ferrari.
Schumacher & Ferrari have left and continue to leave a legacy of how to win...................
Schumacher is the fastest driver around.....
Schumacher is in the fastest package around....
Ferrari's run has gone as long as it has because of the (I hate to use this word) synergy that he brought with him....Todt,Braun,Byrne and all the rest have created an esprit d'corps that's far more stable than that of ANY other team....It takes that kind of stability to produce championship longevity.
I say ( and its probably too late now ) if Schumacher and his family/team were to move to another package, they could achieve repeatable world championships within two years again.
Others, like Williams should be trying to emulate Scuderia Ferrari's complete cohesion. Management absolutely, positively must find a way to identify engineers,drivers,designers, etc that all genuinely want to work together and drop them into a black hole whose event horizon is the world championship, not individual titles, records, poles, etc....those are just outcomes of the greater focus...
Scuderia Ferrari and Schumacher/Barichello have been able to CLEARLY see the big picture for a very long time.
BriDrive
Schumacher & Ferrari have left and continue to leave a legacy of how to win...................
Schumacher is the fastest driver around.....
Schumacher is in the fastest package around....
Ferrari's run has gone as long as it has because of the (I hate to use this word) synergy that he brought with him....Todt,Braun,Byrne and all the rest have created an esprit d'corps that's far more stable than that of ANY other team....It takes that kind of stability to produce championship longevity.
I say ( and its probably too late now ) if Schumacher and his family/team were to move to another package, they could achieve repeatable world championships within two years again.
Others, like Williams should be trying to emulate Scuderia Ferrari's complete cohesion. Management absolutely, positively must find a way to identify engineers,drivers,designers, etc that all genuinely want to work together and drop them into a black hole whose event horizon is the world championship, not individual titles, records, poles, etc....those are just outcomes of the greater focus...
Scuderia Ferrari and Schumacher/Barichello have been able to CLEARLY see the big picture for a very long time.
BriDrive
| AndyRoo | 04-27-2004 02:22 PM |
[QUOTE]Were he not German, we he say, Brazilian, he would be revered and nobody would be uttering a word.[/QUOTE]
I never even thought about that...and i think you're right.
I think he is important because he gives F1 its superstar. Every sport needs one. Its better when theres more then one that can compete against each other, but there should be at least one.
People who dont know the sport well see him and he can get them more interested in it. Think of Michael Jordan and how many kids he was the hero of. These kids were inspired by him and he probably motivated them to start playing basketball. I think its kind of similar here with Schumi. And thats good for the sport.
I never even thought about that...and i think you're right.
I think he is important because he gives F1 its superstar. Every sport needs one. Its better when theres more then one that can compete against each other, but there should be at least one.
People who dont know the sport well see him and he can get them more interested in it. Think of Michael Jordan and how many kids he was the hero of. These kids were inspired by him and he probably motivated them to start playing basketball. I think its kind of similar here with Schumi. And thats good for the sport.
| artkevin | 04-27-2004 02:32 PM |
No, it is not. It keeps the sport from growing beyond were it is now. I love the sport and I like to see MS win, especially in person, becuase he really is that good. But I think a causal watcher would be completely turned off by it. I have several friends that ask "Who one the race this week? Schumacher? HA, I knew it". As a purist of the sport, I personally don't mind it so much but overall I think it is bad.
| crashandburn | 04-27-2004 07:50 PM |
Think of how many more wins/championships he might have if he didn't have to follow team orders when driving under Nigel Mansel.
But he IS good, and if the other teams can't/don't/won't step up to the challenge of "de-throning" MS and Ferrari, well they'll just have to be happy with only being able to be second best.
But he IS good, and if the other teams can't/don't/won't step up to the challenge of "de-throning" MS and Ferrari, well they'll just have to be happy with only being able to be second best.
| johnfelstead | 04-27-2004 08:12 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by crashandburn [/i]
[B]Think of how many more wins/championships he might have if he didn't have to follow team orders when driving under Nigel Mansel.[/B][/QUOTE]
You lost me there? Mansell was never teamed up with shuey and MS has never had to follow team orders, it's always been the other way round with his team mates definately signed as #2 drivers in the team.
I dont agree with if he was brazilian he would be treated any diferently by the motorsport press, Senna wasnt reveared until very late in his career when he had proven how special he was, for most of his career people thought he was as ruthless and hard as schumacher is now percieved to be.
Nationality has no bearing on this, its how they drive, and in 94 MS was a cheat as was his team, Tom Walkinshaw is legendary in how clever he is at cheating and getting away with it, he will try anything to win if he thinks he can get away with it. One of the last things Senna said to Berger before he died was that he felt the Beneton was illegal and was running traction control. The FIA later found the ability to enable traction control was within the Beneton software, but couldnt prove they had actually engaged it so changed the rules to close that loophole.
[B]Think of how many more wins/championships he might have if he didn't have to follow team orders when driving under Nigel Mansel.[/B][/QUOTE]
You lost me there? Mansell was never teamed up with shuey and MS has never had to follow team orders, it's always been the other way round with his team mates definately signed as #2 drivers in the team.
I dont agree with if he was brazilian he would be treated any diferently by the motorsport press, Senna wasnt reveared until very late in his career when he had proven how special he was, for most of his career people thought he was as ruthless and hard as schumacher is now percieved to be.
Nationality has no bearing on this, its how they drive, and in 94 MS was a cheat as was his team, Tom Walkinshaw is legendary in how clever he is at cheating and getting away with it, he will try anything to win if he thinks he can get away with it. One of the last things Senna said to Berger before he died was that he felt the Beneton was illegal and was running traction control. The FIA later found the ability to enable traction control was within the Beneton software, but couldnt prove they had actually engaged it so changed the rules to close that loophole.
| asquaredrex | 04-27-2004 10:49 PM |
I think F1 would be better served by a Valentino Rossi as opposed to a Schuey. Someone with real personality, firey Italian versus cold and calculating German. And when he gets bored of dominating, he gives himself a challenge by moving to an inferior team. I'm sure Toyota would match or beat what Ferrari pays Schuey now. Not that he would ever consider it.
| sdecker | 04-28-2004 08:01 AM |
I voted 'doesn't matter'...
Man, I am in conflict over this poll. I love F1 and there's no question that Schumacher is a great driver. He has certainly drawn in new fans to the sport, and that is 'good' for F1.
On the other hand, it does get a bit boring watching the races these last few years because you are virtually assured of the final positions before you even watch qualifiying. That IMHO is 'bad' for F1.
Don't forget that the current state of F1 is much more than just Schumacher and his dominance. It's also the fact that the other teams have not stepped up to the plate to compete. For what it's worth, look at ALMS -- same thing there. Audi, Audi, Audi. It's 'good' but it's 'bad' because it's booor-ing.
Scott
Man, I am in conflict over this poll. I love F1 and there's no question that Schumacher is a great driver. He has certainly drawn in new fans to the sport, and that is 'good' for F1.
On the other hand, it does get a bit boring watching the races these last few years because you are virtually assured of the final positions before you even watch qualifiying. That IMHO is 'bad' for F1.
Don't forget that the current state of F1 is much more than just Schumacher and his dominance. It's also the fact that the other teams have not stepped up to the plate to compete. For what it's worth, look at ALMS -- same thing there. Audi, Audi, Audi. It's 'good' but it's 'bad' because it's booor-ing.
Scott
| gtguy | 04-28-2004 11:05 AM |
I dunno, John...even in this thread, Schumacher is referred to as the "cold, calculating German." I don't know if it's as overt as, say, the newspaper article which asserted that anti-German sentiment is the only remaining "acceptable" form of discrimination in Europe. And obviously, death certainly enhanced the profile and positive memories of Senna.
But I don't know if there has been, in recent memory (certainly not in mine) the level of unreserved bile that there is for a driver, as there is for Schumacher. Even now, people say "he cheated in 1994." Nobody could prove it, nobody has proven it, there were and still are just the rumors. After all, nobody could be that fast legally now, could they? History has shown us that he is indeed that fast. Jackie Stewart said recently that Senna was supremely gifted, but that Schumacher uses "more" of his gifts. I think this is true. Lap in and lap out, Schumacher can go fast. Other people are good for three, four or five laps. But to be able to drive at near-qualifying effort for lap after lap after lap, is what makes those rare drivers great. Hakkinen had that ability, so did Senna, to name a couple.
If Schumacher went to Toyota, IMHO, they would be on the podium within two seasons, and winning races in three. It's because not only is Schumacher himself a great driver, but he also attracts the best personnel, because everybody likes to win. Ferrari was a joke when he showed up, and now look.
I think that the FIA is asking these same questions with the proposed new rule changes. The sport is too expensive, and one team is too dominant. Nobody was complaining when McLaren or Williams were dominant, but some argue that the Ferrari dominance is a different thing becuase of its lengthy tenure. It's pretty hard to argue with six constructors championships. I don't know if people would be howling as much, to raise another speculative bit, if Ferrari (a beloved marque) were winning constructors' titles, while other drivers were winning the WDC.
What's funny is that, I think, the closer they make the cars in performance, the more Schumacher will shine, and he'll just keep on winning, because he is the best driver. Dominance establishes a target. The problem is that people are whining about it, instead of trying to hit that target. It's crabs in a barrel. When one crab gets ready to climb out, pull it back down. :lol:
Kevin
But I don't know if there has been, in recent memory (certainly not in mine) the level of unreserved bile that there is for a driver, as there is for Schumacher. Even now, people say "he cheated in 1994." Nobody could prove it, nobody has proven it, there were and still are just the rumors. After all, nobody could be that fast legally now, could they? History has shown us that he is indeed that fast. Jackie Stewart said recently that Senna was supremely gifted, but that Schumacher uses "more" of his gifts. I think this is true. Lap in and lap out, Schumacher can go fast. Other people are good for three, four or five laps. But to be able to drive at near-qualifying effort for lap after lap after lap, is what makes those rare drivers great. Hakkinen had that ability, so did Senna, to name a couple.
If Schumacher went to Toyota, IMHO, they would be on the podium within two seasons, and winning races in three. It's because not only is Schumacher himself a great driver, but he also attracts the best personnel, because everybody likes to win. Ferrari was a joke when he showed up, and now look.
I think that the FIA is asking these same questions with the proposed new rule changes. The sport is too expensive, and one team is too dominant. Nobody was complaining when McLaren or Williams were dominant, but some argue that the Ferrari dominance is a different thing becuase of its lengthy tenure. It's pretty hard to argue with six constructors championships. I don't know if people would be howling as much, to raise another speculative bit, if Ferrari (a beloved marque) were winning constructors' titles, while other drivers were winning the WDC.
What's funny is that, I think, the closer they make the cars in performance, the more Schumacher will shine, and he'll just keep on winning, because he is the best driver. Dominance establishes a target. The problem is that people are whining about it, instead of trying to hit that target. It's crabs in a barrel. When one crab gets ready to climb out, pull it back down. :lol:
Kevin
| artkevin | 04-28-2004 12:03 PM |
Ha! Crabs in a barrel. I haven't heard that one in a while. Good anology. The BAR rear wing comes to mind.
| erich_sc | 04-28-2004 01:04 PM |
Hopefully BAR will be able to mix it up a bit. It's simply amazing the amount of progress they made over the winter. Last year at Suzuka was just a hint of how strong they could be this year. Michael's dominance is amazing. It makes you wonder how much is car and how much is driver with Rubens finishing how he is. Don't get me wrong, even then he isn't far off the pace, but he was all excited after Michael won those championships that it was going to be even for both of them. Looks like under even terms he isn't as fast. It makes it hard not to look at MS as any less than the best right now.
| whitenoise77 | 04-28-2004 01:10 PM |
I want to see where MS would place if he is driving for Minardi or Jordan. IF he really is that good then he could be in the middle of the pack with a Minardi instead of last place.
| gtguy | 04-28-2004 01:55 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by whitenoise77 [/i]
[B]I want to see where MS would place if he is driving for Minardi or Jordan. IF he really is that good then he could be in the middle of the pack with a Minardi instead of last place. [/B][/QUOTE]
Erich, some speculate that the new Ferrari, with its shorter wheelbase, isn't as much to Rubens' liking as last year's car was. Who knows? But on race pace, Schumacher is definitely faster.
Regarding the quoted section, the Minardi is more than five seconds per lap slower than the top cars. If Schumacher is worth a second per lap (which is a lot), he'd still be last in a Minardi. That car is horrific. A more interesting question might be how would he fare in a car that is a second or so slower, such as a Williams or Renault. I think he'd win in the latter, and have the former on the podium.
Kevin
[B]I want to see where MS would place if he is driving for Minardi or Jordan. IF he really is that good then he could be in the middle of the pack with a Minardi instead of last place. [/B][/QUOTE]
Erich, some speculate that the new Ferrari, with its shorter wheelbase, isn't as much to Rubens' liking as last year's car was. Who knows? But on race pace, Schumacher is definitely faster.
Regarding the quoted section, the Minardi is more than five seconds per lap slower than the top cars. If Schumacher is worth a second per lap (which is a lot), he'd still be last in a Minardi. That car is horrific. A more interesting question might be how would he fare in a car that is a second or so slower, such as a Williams or Renault. I think he'd win in the latter, and have the former on the podium.
Kevin
| FatChanceTi | 04-28-2004 05:21 PM |
I dunno how having the "best" open-wheeld driver in the world right now can be bad. This is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsports after all.
I don't think the problem in F1 is with Schumacher. Hell, he's doing his job, and doing it damn well.
It's these other wankers (Williams, Toyota, McLaren) who are bringing it down right now imho.
C'mon guys, raise your game!
FCTi
I don't think the problem in F1 is with Schumacher. Hell, he's doing his job, and doing it damn well.
It's these other wankers (Williams, Toyota, McLaren) who are bringing it down right now imho.
C'mon guys, raise your game!
FCTi
| johnfelstead | 04-28-2004 07:47 PM |
i wouldnt call the likes of Williams, Wankers. Thats a rediculous statement.
I dont dispute MS talent, he is awesome, but he is also flawed and does make mistakes, sometimes he does seriously dodgy moves too.
Rubens is his perfect team mate, no mental strength. Until he has a guy like Prost in his team, as Senna did, he wont prove to me he is as great a driver. He has it too easy IMHO. :)
I dont dispute MS talent, he is awesome, but he is also flawed and does make mistakes, sometimes he does seriously dodgy moves too.
Rubens is his perfect team mate, no mental strength. Until he has a guy like Prost in his team, as Senna did, he wont prove to me he is as great a driver. He has it too easy IMHO. :)
| FatChanceTi | 04-28-2004 08:16 PM |
Perhaps "wankers" was a bit strong, but despite Michael's flaws (Japan last year being exhibit A) he's still wiping the floor with everyone else RIGHT NOW. He's looked pretty good this year so far I'd say.
And yes, Schumi/Barichello is certainly not a Prost/Senna esque combination, but what are the goals in F1?
Manufacturers Championship?
Check
Drivers Championship?
Check
I still say Ferrari/Schumacher is doing just fine. Rubens elevates his game when needed, and provides a lot of consistency when he's not on his "A" game.
Renault/Williams/McLaren are not sacking up to this point in the season.
I personally just hate sandbagging a team/car for the sake of making a series competitive.
Raise your game.
And yes, Schumi/Barichello is certainly not a Prost/Senna esque combination, but what are the goals in F1?
Manufacturers Championship?
Check
Drivers Championship?
Check
I still say Ferrari/Schumacher is doing just fine. Rubens elevates his game when needed, and provides a lot of consistency when he's not on his "A" game.
Renault/Williams/McLaren are not sacking up to this point in the season.
I personally just hate sandbagging a team/car for the sake of making a series competitive.
Raise your game.
| StuBeck | 04-28-2004 08:59 PM |
I think it could be better if he allowed his teammate to compete like Prost did with Senna. Right now its not great for the series, but I think when his dominance starts to weign like late last year it will be good for the series.
| wistful | 04-28-2004 10:01 PM |
but the question is, given free reign, can Barichello stick it to Schumacher? Judging by his performance este ano, no. Previous years, perhaps. But like you said, maybe this yr's car is not to his liking.
Don
Don
| gtguy | 04-29-2004 11:50 AM |
I think that Barrichello is allowed to compete. The rumors that he isn't allowed to race, or is being given an inferior car, just aren't true. He just isn't as fast as Schumacher, and never will be. There will always be the weekend or two per season where Barrichello will be unbeatable. Silverstone last year was one, Suzuka was another, and he would have done very well at Brazil, were it not for that "fuel pickup problem," which is F1 for "he ran out of gas." :lol:
It isn't Schumacher's fault that he's as good as he is, and works as hard as he does, nor is it his fault that there isn't really anyone of his caliber in F1 at present. Raikkonen will be there, as he is quite talented, no question. Montoya will never be there, ditto for Alonso. Drivers such as Webber or Button wouldn't be much better than Barrichello.
Besides, who in their right mind would want to partner someone that can beat them like a drum week in and week out? Barrichello is very fast, and very talented, certainly one of the top five drivers in F1. But Imola demonstrated why he just doesn't have the mentality to excel. Schumacher would have found a way past those slower cars, on the track or otherwise. Barrichello couldn't/didn't, even though if you look at his racing line compared to the cars he was stuck behind (R. Schumacher, Trulli) he wasn't using anywhere near the amount of track the other drivers were. He was definitely faster.
I think that the other teams (well, not McLaren...) will definitely catch up to Ferrari. Renault still needs a bit more power, and Williams needs a bit more something or other. BAR should do very well at Barcelona. Don't forget that they have owned that track all during testing season, etc. This could be Button's first win. Once somebody else notches a win, people should calm down.
But I think that talk that Schumacher is "holding down" Barrichello, or that Barrichello isn't being allowed to race to his full potential, is misinformed. Barrichello is the no. 2 driver at Ferrari, in that the team is set up to have Schumacher win. This is no different from cycling, or a host of other sports where teams have a no. 1 rider. Perhaps if other teams adopted a no. 1 structure, they would be more focussed.
I would further argue that, with his pace, talent and hard work at raising Ferrari up from pack fodder to excellence, that Schumacher has earned his no. 1 status. In thinking about this debate, I don't know if speculation about whether or not he is good for F1, even though everyone is having it, even at the Ecclestone/Mosley level, is fruitful. He's here, he's good, and short of the FIA adopting the "success ballast" of other series, his dominance is a reality.
Kevin
It isn't Schumacher's fault that he's as good as he is, and works as hard as he does, nor is it his fault that there isn't really anyone of his caliber in F1 at present. Raikkonen will be there, as he is quite talented, no question. Montoya will never be there, ditto for Alonso. Drivers such as Webber or Button wouldn't be much better than Barrichello.
Besides, who in their right mind would want to partner someone that can beat them like a drum week in and week out? Barrichello is very fast, and very talented, certainly one of the top five drivers in F1. But Imola demonstrated why he just doesn't have the mentality to excel. Schumacher would have found a way past those slower cars, on the track or otherwise. Barrichello couldn't/didn't, even though if you look at his racing line compared to the cars he was stuck behind (R. Schumacher, Trulli) he wasn't using anywhere near the amount of track the other drivers were. He was definitely faster.
I think that the other teams (well, not McLaren...) will definitely catch up to Ferrari. Renault still needs a bit more power, and Williams needs a bit more something or other. BAR should do very well at Barcelona. Don't forget that they have owned that track all during testing season, etc. This could be Button's first win. Once somebody else notches a win, people should calm down.
But I think that talk that Schumacher is "holding down" Barrichello, or that Barrichello isn't being allowed to race to his full potential, is misinformed. Barrichello is the no. 2 driver at Ferrari, in that the team is set up to have Schumacher win. This is no different from cycling, or a host of other sports where teams have a no. 1 rider. Perhaps if other teams adopted a no. 1 structure, they would be more focussed.
I would further argue that, with his pace, talent and hard work at raising Ferrari up from pack fodder to excellence, that Schumacher has earned his no. 1 status. In thinking about this debate, I don't know if speculation about whether or not he is good for F1, even though everyone is having it, even at the Ecclestone/Mosley level, is fruitful. He's here, he's good, and short of the FIA adopting the "success ballast" of other series, his dominance is a reality.
Kevin
| artkevin | 04-29-2004 12:19 PM |
gtguy,
I think that we all have to agree that Schumacher is like the great one, Wayne Gertsky. He really is on another level. Everything moves so slow and smooth for him. He rarely makes a mistake and he is exteremly consistent.
If he wasn't in F1 I think there would be a good 6 or so people capable of wining the championship(JPM, KR, FA, JB,MW, RS, DC etc). I dont think that they are a "lower" or subpar level as long as that one guy is not in the equation. So I have to give it to Shuey on the fact that he is just that good. He is great to watch becuae every time he takes the track you are watching history but you are not watching excitement so much.
I think that we all have to agree that Schumacher is like the great one, Wayne Gertsky. He really is on another level. Everything moves so slow and smooth for him. He rarely makes a mistake and he is exteremly consistent.
If he wasn't in F1 I think there would be a good 6 or so people capable of wining the championship(JPM, KR, FA, JB,MW, RS, DC etc). I dont think that they are a "lower" or subpar level as long as that one guy is not in the equation. So I have to give it to Shuey on the fact that he is just that good. He is great to watch becuae every time he takes the track you are watching history but you are not watching excitement so much.
| BriDrive | 04-29-2004 02:07 PM |
When you talk about how fast a driver is....most "experts" believe that MS is about .5 seconds faster than anyone else out there, taking the car out of the equation.
That's about on par with his spreads over Rubens in races where they both finish and you take out other variables such as slacking up to conserve brakes or engine or tires or other to finish the race. (MS races, when in front, at the slowest speed needed to win)
I think a bigger factor in explaining Ruben's speed variance to Schumacher's is in Scuderia Ferrari's pit strategies. As #2, RB is frequently running the more conservative strategy, depending upon track, to insure if MS were to fail, that a Ferrari is still in it...
Also, if on same strategy, MS is almost always 1st in.
Rubens is ALOT faster than he is given credit...comparing qualifying times over several seasons is also quite demonstrative.
Anywho.....great stuff....I wish I could find an article I read awhile back, that compared telemetry graphics and interviews to demonstrate the differences between MS and RB on several different circuits in the same year. They are both extraordinarily fast and consistent AND they drive COMPLETELY differently. Rubens being more of a slow in fast out, brake and go'er whereas MS is an apparent MASTER at trailbraking and brake modulating completely through apexes in many cases....
That's about on par with his spreads over Rubens in races where they both finish and you take out other variables such as slacking up to conserve brakes or engine or tires or other to finish the race. (MS races, when in front, at the slowest speed needed to win)
I think a bigger factor in explaining Ruben's speed variance to Schumacher's is in Scuderia Ferrari's pit strategies. As #2, RB is frequently running the more conservative strategy, depending upon track, to insure if MS were to fail, that a Ferrari is still in it...
Also, if on same strategy, MS is almost always 1st in.
Rubens is ALOT faster than he is given credit...comparing qualifying times over several seasons is also quite demonstrative.
Anywho.....great stuff....I wish I could find an article I read awhile back, that compared telemetry graphics and interviews to demonstrate the differences between MS and RB on several different circuits in the same year. They are both extraordinarily fast and consistent AND they drive COMPLETELY differently. Rubens being more of a slow in fast out, brake and go'er whereas MS is an apparent MASTER at trailbraking and brake modulating completely through apexes in many cases....
| gtguy | 04-29-2004 02:22 PM |
The other thing I'll have to find is a study, via telemetry and the TV feed, of Schumacher's and Montoya's qualifying lap at Bahrain, that explaines exactly how Schumacher went faster. It further serves to illustrate why he is the best right now.
Kevin
Kevin
| ShockWave | 04-29-2004 04:06 PM |
I certainly think that we are in the presence of greatness with M. Schumacher. The "whose better" debate has fallen all the way to Schumacher vs. Nuvolari, a driver of completely different cars running completely different roads in a completely different era. Confidentially--I think if you could put the two against each other, Schuey would adapt within two races and school Nuvolari.
That being said, this is definitely bad for Formula 1. Can Am is my example. Can Am was an interesting race with a number of rivalries, until the Donohue developed 917-30s showed up. People are talking about Schumacher sweeping the season, or all but a race or two, well Mark Donohue did it. And Can Am was dead shortly thereafter.
Granted it's predecessor, ALMS, is growing well but the races are very different. Four classes running four different speeds means there is always passing going on somewhere. And they are lucky, as Dr. Panoz has turned out to be quite the race promoter! Still, I think the prototype class will need to be completely overhauled or it will become altogether irrelevant.
Now I understand we are talking about completely different series here, but I think we'll see the same results. The small teams will get squeezed out as sponsors leave - Minardi, Jordan. Manufactures will fail to be able to justify the expense, and the embarrassment, and will bow out - Jaguar, Toyota, and Mercedes. That leaves Ferrari, Williams BMW, and Sauber. Six cars.
Go ahead, picture a starting grid with only three rows. The engine swap penalty wouldn�t even apply!
I suppose new small teams could arrise, but when was the last time a small team entered F1? It's been one disaster after another for the little guys and I don't see that turning around.
That being said, this is definitely bad for Formula 1. Can Am is my example. Can Am was an interesting race with a number of rivalries, until the Donohue developed 917-30s showed up. People are talking about Schumacher sweeping the season, or all but a race or two, well Mark Donohue did it. And Can Am was dead shortly thereafter.
Granted it's predecessor, ALMS, is growing well but the races are very different. Four classes running four different speeds means there is always passing going on somewhere. And they are lucky, as Dr. Panoz has turned out to be quite the race promoter! Still, I think the prototype class will need to be completely overhauled or it will become altogether irrelevant.
Now I understand we are talking about completely different series here, but I think we'll see the same results. The small teams will get squeezed out as sponsors leave - Minardi, Jordan. Manufactures will fail to be able to justify the expense, and the embarrassment, and will bow out - Jaguar, Toyota, and Mercedes. That leaves Ferrari, Williams BMW, and Sauber. Six cars.
Go ahead, picture a starting grid with only three rows. The engine swap penalty wouldn�t even apply!
I suppose new small teams could arrise, but when was the last time a small team entered F1? It's been one disaster after another for the little guys and I don't see that turning around.
| BriDrive | 04-29-2004 05:24 PM |
"That being said, this is definitely bad for Formula 1. Can Am is my example. Can Am was an interesting race with a number of rivalries, until the Donohue developed 917-30s showed up. People are talking about Schumacher sweeping the season, or all but a race or two, well Mark Donohue did it. And Can Am was dead shortly thereafter." ( By ShockWave )
This is kinda the central point here....
Is it the driver's fault for the death of that series, or is it the series organizer's fault for not evening the field. In the case of Can Am, the Porsche you mentioned is what killed the series, or rather the ability to level the playing field that is......
Schumacher is a driver.....a great one...but the bigger "problem" is that Ferrari is dominating.....who do you blame. Do you blame the other competitors/manufacturers because they can't catch them, do you blame the FIA and Bernie and management...
F1 has evolved into something completely different than its former self....go back to the 50's and see who and what were fighting it out for the world championship....This was its infancy...
My guess is F1 in its current guise is running to the end of its road and not because of Schumacher.....its evolution is almost complete.
FIA needs to create a brand new formula in the coming years along with the factory incentive to go with it, that is new from the ground up....let it evolve all over again, sustaining itself for another few decades...............Painful, difficult, and may not ever happen............it may be new space age chassis' and hybrid or other powerplant stuff............
My greater analogy: F1 in the 50's = the Wright Bros developing an aircraft
F1 in '00's = McDonnellDouglas / General Dynamics / Boeing / Airbus developing combat aircraft surpassing human ability to fly them.
BriDrive
This is kinda the central point here....
Is it the driver's fault for the death of that series, or is it the series organizer's fault for not evening the field. In the case of Can Am, the Porsche you mentioned is what killed the series, or rather the ability to level the playing field that is......
Schumacher is a driver.....a great one...but the bigger "problem" is that Ferrari is dominating.....who do you blame. Do you blame the other competitors/manufacturers because they can't catch them, do you blame the FIA and Bernie and management...
F1 has evolved into something completely different than its former self....go back to the 50's and see who and what were fighting it out for the world championship....This was its infancy...
My guess is F1 in its current guise is running to the end of its road and not because of Schumacher.....its evolution is almost complete.
FIA needs to create a brand new formula in the coming years along with the factory incentive to go with it, that is new from the ground up....let it evolve all over again, sustaining itself for another few decades...............Painful, difficult, and may not ever happen............it may be new space age chassis' and hybrid or other powerplant stuff............
My greater analogy: F1 in the 50's = the Wright Bros developing an aircraft
F1 in '00's = McDonnellDouglas / General Dynamics / Boeing / Airbus developing combat aircraft surpassing human ability to fly them.
BriDrive
| AndyRoo | 04-29-2004 06:04 PM |
nuvolari wasnt only great cause he was the fastest of the time (which he pretty much was), but cause of his incredible determination and resolve. its a different kind of greatness, which you cant really compare to today's drivers.
[URL=http://filebox.vt.edu/users/sekellic/pictures/nuvo4.jpg]Exhibit A[/URL]
And i dont think you can ever compare drivers from different times cause obviously the driver who is used to the faster car will be able to adapt to the slower car better then the other way around. probably. the auto unions were pretty damn fast though...
[URL=http://filebox.vt.edu/users/sekellic/pictures/nuvo4.jpg]Exhibit A[/URL]
And i dont think you can ever compare drivers from different times cause obviously the driver who is used to the faster car will be able to adapt to the slower car better then the other way around. probably. the auto unions were pretty damn fast though...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét