Tbh, I don't think with Hamilton there's a lot of merit to his team mate having advantage due to being "more familiar" with the car. Ham is a racer at heart, and he seems to be able to extract all avail speed in the car that that car can offer. Now how well he works with the engineers, knows the changes needed, and guides and directs the development of the car over the weekend I'm guessing is an entirely different skill set which Ros may very well have advantage. Slight difference yes, but not so slight when the top ten are within a second of one another as we have seen of late...Maybe Ros is simply better at working with people and therefore pulling a car into focus thats lost? Hams advantage being to "get in it and drive the s&@t out of it" ... but if the car just does not have the better set up, there's only so much one can do polishing a terd.ChrisDanger wrote:Wouldn't Rosberg have an advantage since he is much more familiar with the car? Or would Hamilton already be used to it's characteristics?Chuckjr wrote:...nice seeing Rosburg showing strong form in quali of late. I can't remember a team mate since Alonso that consistently challenged Ham
By that logic Alonso, kimi, Button, Massa, Rosberg and Webber (agree with that one) should all retire to. Vettel would have it so easy.fiohaa wrote:i think Hamilton's getting too old, he should call it an end to his career - after all he got comprehensively beaten by Rosberg in Spain and dropped out the points.
hes clearly past it.
well i wasn't trolling. it was obviously a jab at people who, if schumi had finished 12th on Sunday, would have said those exact words.GrizzleBoy wrote:I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic/trolling
So are you suggesting that the myth about Hamilton not being able to look after his tyres in the race still exists?fiohaa wrote:well i wasn't trolling. it was obviously a jab at people who, if schumi had finished 12th on Sunday, would have said those exact words.GrizzleBoy wrote:I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic/trolling
but when Hamilton is in the car.....Ooooooh its all the cars fault isn't it?
(and im not dissing Ham at all, hes an awesome driver who cannot use ANY of his primary skills in this current racing, which is driving flat out at all times)
No he isn'tDyanxx wrote:So are you suggesting that the myth about Hamilton not being able to look after his tyres in the race still exists?fiohaa wrote: well i wasn't trolling. it was obviously a jab at people who, if schumi had finished 12th on Sunday, would have said those exact words.
but when Hamilton is in the car.....Ooooooh its all the cars fault isn't it?
(and im not dissing Ham at all, hes an awesome driver who cannot use ANY of his primary skills in this current racing, which is driving flat out at all times)
Because if so, that's absolute rubbish.
It's a mix of bad luck and driver mistake;beelsebob wrote:I can see Rosberg beating Hamilton to pole here to be honest. Hamilton loves the circuit, but has never really gone particularly well here.
At Canada though, I'd expect Hamilton to blow Rosberg out of the water.
Senna would have probably get beaten a few more times as well:beelsebob wrote: The thing is, there are many who don't think Schumacher really deserves the "great" title that much either (don't get me wrong, he's clearly a talented driver). Instead, he just hit the sport at a time when there weren't that many great drivers (at least after 94), and got lucky with cars.
Basically, the greatest talents that Schumacher faced were Senna (who probably would have beaten him several more times, given the performance of the williams in subsequent years), Hakinnen (who beat him as often as got beaten), and well... no one else really very talented after 1994. Add to that the the Ferrari was the bomb between 2000 and 2005 and he pretty much had everything sewn up before he even started.
Careful now, remember that the Williams in 1994 was dodgy at the start, and improved greatly later on to a point where Hill was challenging for the title closely, it is not unreasonable to think that Senna would have done a better job than Hill and won the title that year. We will never know what would have happened though.LionKing wrote: Senna would have probably get beaten a few more times as well:
In 1992 his first full season Schumacher beat Senna.
In 1993 Senna beat Schumacher.
In 1994 it was 20-0 before Imola happened.
This is what I was sort of getting at, I was not sure how much money Hulky had in his pocket to sway teams. I am not big Hulky fan, I have no opinion of him as a person, but as a driver I think he deserves a chance with a biggish team. Heck, he defo deserves a seat in F1.n smikle wrote:
Nico needs to get sponsors and FAST! The Siroktin Gutierrez cash combo is just too much for Peter Sauber to refuse.
Senna claimed 3 pole positions with 1994 car at the beginning of the season. At Brasil he spun out towards the end of the race when 5 secs behind. At the second race, he was passed by Schumacher at the start and was out due to contact. At Imola he was a few seconds in front. So definitely Williams was also very good car at the start as well.sennafan24 wrote:Careful now, remember that the Williams in 1994 was dodgy at the start, and improved greatly later on to a point where Hill was challenging for the title closely, it is not unreasonable to think that Senna would have done a better job than Hill and won the title that year. We will never know what would have happened though.LionKing wrote: Senna would have probably get beaten a few more times as well:
In 1992 his first full season Schumacher beat Senna.
In 1993 Senna beat Schumacher.
In 1994 it was 20-0 before Imola happened.
I will leave out my analysis of 1992 and 1993, as I do not want to annoy the mods with fanboy ying/yang. I do agree with your points about Schumi later on though. 1999 even I forget he was well on his way to the title before Silverstone.