Will Schumacher's Race Win and WDC records be broken?

[dans79]

I have never seen anyone agreeing with anyone here, unless they stand on one side.

You haven't been looking very hard then!

[Moore77]

I have never seen anyone agreeing with anyone here, unless they stand on one side.

You haven't been looking very hard then!

You don't stare too hard at shallow waters.

[dans79]

I have never seen anyone agreeing with anyone here, unless they stand on one side.

You haven't been looking very hard then!

You don't stare too hard at shallow waters.

If the water is shallow then why are you here?

[NathanOlder]

Some of this is pretty funny. I mean, drivers have come out in the past to say they had number 2 status next to Michael (Rubens and Johnny) , and some said they didn't want to go to Michaels team to be a number 2 (DC).

Never has anyone ever said anything about being a number 2 to Lewis. Never have they been held back in a title fight, only ever been used later in a season to help Lewis when their own title is gone. Which is how F1 works, always has, always will..... YET...... people still claim Lewis has a number 2! Jesus, why can some be so blind or bitter. Is it just to try and take something away from Lewis? Or to try and just make yourself feel better?

It doesn't matter which one it is, the fact remains Lewis is closing in on all records, and he's done it without a 'number 2 servant' and he hasn't done it with dirty driving. Both of which Michael Schumacher had plenty.

In the now famous words of Bono "GET IN THERE LEWIS"

[Hammer44]

Hamilton is better than Schumacher. When Senna died, Schumacher had no rivals and was essentially competing in a weak era against the likes of Hill, Villeneuve, Coulthard, Frentzen, Berger, Alesi, Trulli, Panis, Fisichella, and many others who were all generally average at best. Even Hakkinen was nothing special. He crumbled under pressure many times and was beaten twice in 97, 2001 by David Coulthard who everyone knows was a second-rate driver. He spent so many years driving outstanding cars while being paired with mediocre teammates, the likes of Martin Brundle, Ricardo Patrese (40 years old), Jos Verstappen, JJ Lehto, Johnny Herbert, Eddie Irvine, Barrichello, and Massa. They were all average at best but nobody holds that against Schumacher. For the majority of his career, Schumacher almost always enjoyed a dominant car and clear number 1 status. He even had the tires designed to suit his style and unlimited testing on Ferrari's own track. Even Bottas is much better than all of Schumacher's teammates put together. If he had an inferior car against the likes of Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, Rosberg, Button Verstappen or Leclerc back then, he wouldn't stand a chance fighting for WDC till the last race let alone be champion. He only made it possible because Hill, Villeneuve, Frentzen, and Coulthard were utter crap and slow as hell compared to the drivers I mentioned even though they had incredible cars at their disposal.

[PlatinumZealot]

The last time Bottas was asked to let lewis by, Lewis was clearly disturbed. Lewis made it clear it is not the way he wants to win.

“I’ve never, ever, ever asked for a number one clause,” Hamilton told Sky Sports News HQ. “Sebastian will have that. Fernando always asks for that. I have never, ever asked for that.


“I want to beat the guy, at his best, next to me and then I’ll know where I stand. It’s never been a case of wanting to tie someone’s hands behind their back and beat them and be happy with it. I know a lot of people here would be happy with that, but that’s not me.”

[e30ernest]

I think I understand where Moore77 is coming from, though I may not agree with him. His idea here is that while Hamilton does not have a contractual clause to have a number 2 driver, the fact that Mercedes has kept Bottas in its lineup suggests that perhaps it is deliberately getting drivers that are just good enough to be within reach of Hamilton, but not actually good enough to usurp him.

Of those teammates though, even the likes of Kovalainen held a lot of promise when he was being hired as Hamilton's teammate. Rosberg was also a very highly rated driver. The thing is, Hamilton simply turned out to be better than them over a season. Rosberg and especially Bottas have shown that they can qualify on top of Hamilton, or even win races off him, but I think Hamilton just beats them over the season through his own merit. And maybe the simple skill gulf is where that idea of Mercedes maintaining a number 2 driver comes from.

Let's also not forget the 2 world champions (discounting Rosberg because he wasn't a champion at the start of him working with Lewis) he was paired up against. Alonso would like to push the narrative that McLaren supported Hamilton over him. But Marc Priestley recently talked about how everyone on the team wanted to back Alonso because of his status as the current champion and no one was really that excited to work with Hamilton. Button (apart from Rosberg) was another driver who put up a good fight against Hamilton (actually winning 1 season over him) so I don't think he was a number 2 either.

[Moore77]

I think I understand where Moore77 is coming from, though I may not agree with him. His idea here is that while Hamilton does not have a contractual clause to have a number 2 driver, the fact that Mercedes has kept Bottas in its lineup suggests that perhaps it is deliberately getting drivers that are just good enough to be within reach of Hamilton, but not actually good enough to usurp him.

That's a simple fact. While he took the defacto No.1 by his sheer performance and put the team in a position to operate his team mate in No.2 capacity, Ferrari simply did not have to go through that exercise to give the No.1 status as they didn't feel it necessary to create some kind of a reputation of equal opportunity employer for their drivers. On many occasions, Hamilton has moaned that, it is good to fight with other teams than his own team members. It's also a fact that, Mercedes did not hire Ricciardo, who definitely is a better driver than Bottas. That shows, they are happy with what Bottas is doing, despite not being labelled No.2, but a wing man (credit to Toto).

Of those teammates though, even the likes of Kovalainen held a lot of promise when he was being hired as Hamilton's teammate. Rosberg was also a very highly rated driver. The thing is, Hamilton simply turned out to be better than them over a season. Rosberg and especially Bottas have shown that they can qualify on top of Hamilton, or even win races off him, but I think Hamilton just beats them over the season through his own merit. And maybe the simple skill gulf is where that idea of Mercedes maintaining a number 2 driver comes from.

Some Hamilton fans are so much engrossed in proving that his success is greater than of Schumacher's, they are failing to understand what is being argued here. For them, it's just about Schumacher had a No. 2 designate and Hamilton did not and hence, his success is greater. So deeply buried in that one dimensional thinking, every argument with a slightly different flair, is drawn into that muddy pit and try to beat that argument there. It's so hard for them to not be objective on any other aspect of comparison. For that, they try to play up his team mates, despite them being so poor in skill and in performance.

One simple fact like, McLaren had two seperate strategy teams operating for two drivers that allowed each driver to do whatever they wanted, goes unnoticed. The reason that Mercedes employed rules of engagement (leader pits first, stick to same number of pit stops) that handicapped Hamilton in so many cases, without which, he could have beaten his team mates even more and made them even more discreditable, including Rosberg, especially when there was no other challengers in sight.

[Wass85]

Unless they were both teammates then it's all guesswork.

In my honest opinion Schumacher at his peak was too fast and relentless for Hamilton.

He would hold a decent qualifying advantage over a season and control the races from there. Of course Hamilton would have the odd standout race and beat Schumacher but over a season he just isn't consistent enough.

Outright speed matters and the German was just plain faster in qualifying and race trim.

Put a prime Schumacher in that Merc and he would have won every title there was to win.

[NathanOlder]

Unless they were both teammates then it's all guesswork.

In my honest opinion Schumacher at his peak was too fast and relentless for Hamilton.

He would hold a decent qualifying advantage over a season and control the races from there. Of course Hamilton would have the odd standout race and beat Schumacher but over a season he just isn't consistent enough.

Outright speed matters and the German was just plain faster in qualifying and race trim.

Put a prime Schumacher in that Merc and he would have won every title there was to win.

You joking or something. Your first sentence...... "Unless they were both team mates, then its all guesswork"

You then go to say Schumacher WAS faster in race and qualy but I don't recall them ever being team mates



The only measurement we have on this whole debate is Nico Rosberg.

Lewis > Nico > Michael

all head to head in the same car, they were all team mates, so we have an answer.

Before you say anything about Michael being old ect, its on him. He chose to come back, he chose to put his record at risk, he lost to Nico who lost to Lewis. The same will probably happen to Lewis. If Russell comes in, beats him in head to head during their time together, and then goes on to beat all of Lewis records, that in my book makes him better than Lewis. Especially if he does it clean and without his team mate having his hands tied behind his back.

[Wass85]

Unless they were both teammates then it's all guesswork.

In my honest opinion Schumacher at his peak was too fast and relentless for Hamilton.

He would hold a decent qualifying advantage over a season and control the races from there. Of course Hamilton would have the odd standout race and beat Schumacher but over a season he just isn't consistent enough.

Outright speed matters and the German was just plain faster in qualifying and race trim.

Put a prime Schumacher in that Merc and he would have won every title there was to win.

You joking or something. Your first sentence...... "Unless they were both team mates, then its all guesswork"

You then go to say Schumacher WAS faster in race and qualy but I don't recall them ever being team mates



The only measurement we have on this whole debate is Nico Rosberg.

Lewis > Nico > Michael

all head to head in the same car, they were all team mates, so we have an answer.

Before you say anything about Michael being old ect, its on him. He chose to come back, he chose to put his record at risk, he lost to Nico who lost to Lewis. The same will probably happen to Lewis. If Russell comes in, beats him in head to head during their time together, and then goes on to beat all of Lewis records, that in my book makes him better than Lewis. Especially if he does it clean and without his team mate having his hands tied behind his back.

Although obviously age matters it was probably more the fact that he hadn't been in a F1 car for 3 years that hurt him most, if not then how do you explain Schumacher being closer to Rosberg in 2012 in their 3 seasons partnered together? If it was just a case of age then Schumacher would be performing the worst in that last year.

Of course it's all guesswork but you just have to step back and think for a second, you honestly think Bottas would be that close to a prime Schumacher in qualifying to what he is to Hamilton now?

[mkay]

I think I understand where Moore77 is coming from, though I may not agree with him. His idea here is that while Hamilton does not have a contractual clause to have a number 2 driver, the fact that Mercedes has kept Bottas in its lineup suggests that perhaps it is deliberately getting drivers that are just good enough to be within reach of Hamilton, but not actually good enough to usurp him.

That's a simple fact. While he took the defacto No.1 by his sheer performance and put the team in a position to operate his team mate in No.2 capacity, Ferrari simply did not have to go through that exercise to give the No.1 status as they didn't feel it necessary to create some kind of a reputation of equal opportunity employer for their drivers. On many occasions, Hamilton has moaned that, it is good to fight with other teams than his own team members. It's also a fact that, Mercedes did not hire Ricciardo, who definitely is a better driver than Bottas. That shows, they are happy with what Bottas is doing, despite not being labelled No.2, but a wing man (credit to Toto).

No it's not. Ricciardo and Bottas haven't raced together in F1, so your "fact" is nothing more than a hypothesis.

For what it's worth, the last time they raced together in equal machinery, Bottas actually beat Ricciardo (Formula Renault).

Main reason why Mercedes wouldn't want to hire Ricciardo: there just isn't a need. As long as the team keeps securing the WCC (and doesn't care as long as a Merc driver wins the WDC), then they will be fine with the current line-up. Their decision not to replace Bottas with Ocon has proven wise so far given Ocon's disappointing performance at Renault this season.

[NathanOlder]

Unless they were both teammates then it's all guesswork.

In my honest opinion Schumacher at his peak was too fast and relentless for Hamilton.

He would hold a decent qualifying advantage over a season and control the races from there. Of course Hamilton would have the odd standout race and beat Schumacher but over a season he just isn't consistent enough.

Outright speed matters and the German was just plain faster in qualifying and race trim.

Put a prime Schumacher in that Merc and he would have won every title there was to win.

You joking or something. Your first sentence...... "Unless they were both team mates, then its all guesswork"

You then go to say Schumacher WAS faster in race and qualy but I don't recall them ever being team mates



The only measurement we have on this whole debate is Nico Rosberg.

Lewis > Nico > Michael

all head to head in the same car, they were all team mates, so we have an answer.

Before you say anything about Michael being old ect, its on him. He chose to come back, he chose to put his record at risk, he lost to Nico who lost to Lewis. The same will probably happen to Lewis. If Russell comes in, beats him in head to head during their time together, and then goes on to beat all of Lewis records, that in my book makes him better than Lewis. Especially if he does it clean and without his team mate having his hands tied behind his back.

Although obviously age matters it was probably more the fact that he hadn't been in a F1 car for 3 years that hurt him most, if not then how do you explain Schumacher being closer to Rosberg in 2012 in their 3 seasons partnered together? If it was just a case of age then Schumacher would be performing the worst in that last year.

Of course it's all guesswork but you just have to step back and think for a second, you honestly think Bottas would be that close to a prime Schumacher in qualifying to what he is to Hamilton now?

If Bottas is as close as he is to Hamilton, why would he be miles away from Schumacher ? One of Bottas' strengths is his qualy pace. But rather than saying Bottas is fast in qualy, you want it to be Hamilton is slow in qualy

[Just_a_fan]

There is one simple fact - Ferrari placed the team around Schumacher as the man they wanted to get the title with. The team focused on him. He was given number one status both in contract and in the team's actions.

Mercedes have always put the team's results over that of the drivers. So long as the team wins the title, whichever driver wins the drivers' title is down to them competing. If the team can get a one-two then that's good enough for them. We've seen the drivers being told to hold station irrespective of which one is leading, we've seen the drivers being told they can race too, at time, but to be clean in doing so. That's all being done for the team. The team comes first. Very different to Schumacher's period at Ferrari.

Interestingly, RedBull focused on Vettel, in the way Ferrari focused on Michael, just as they are focusing on Max today. RedBull have stated that their aim was to make Max the youngest World Champion - that's a public statement of driver preference over another. Ferrari have done it with Vettel, as we all remember well, by publicly stating that Vettel was their man for the season.

That's not denigrating drivers, that's just stating the facts about how the teams have chosen to work. The drivers perform in the environment the teams build. But any records must be viewed in the light of that environment before you get down the details of the individual drivers and their performances.

We can never know how two drivers might have performed if they shared the same team because they haven't done so. It's all speculation. But the environment would play a big part in it. Schumacher/Hamilton at Ferrari in the early 2000s would be different to Shumacher/Hamilton at Mercedes these last few years, that's for sure, because the rules of engagement - the environment created by the team - would be different.

[Moore77]

You haven't been looking very hard then!

You don't stare too hard at shallow waters.

If the water is shallow then why are you here?

I would definitely answer that question, if you can please clear me, with what authority are you asking that question?