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

[dans79]

Hamilton struggled to do well in both 2009 and 2013.

Everyone struggled to do well in 2013 unless your last name was Vettel, especially after the summer break when they reverted the tire compounds.

[Moore77]

Yep, that's more than some drivers achieved in a year when they won a WDC!

The point is, he struggled in 2009 compared to Vettel. That was the argument, not how many poles or how many wins he had. Jolle was talking about how Hamilton adapts well whereas Vettel and Schumacher struggled when things changed and I pointed to him that, Hamilton struggled to do well in both 2009 and 2013. With a vastly improved car in the second half of 2009, the results came as expected. He could barely make an impact in the first half.

Heck, even Kimi did well with a win. Trulli got a pole in Toyota, Fernando got a pole in Renault and Fisichella got one in Force India! They were much bigger achievements compared to a supremely well funded McLaren.

you missed the point. I didn't say Schumacher (and Vettel) struggled with a car, but with a new rule set.

2009 was a different rule set. 2013 was a different car (although same rules). Both times, Hamilton didn't make an impact.

[Phil]

The point is, he struggled in 2009 compared to Vettel. That was the argument, not how many poles or how many wins he had. Jolle was talking about how Hamilton adapts well whereas Vettel and Schumacher struggled when things changed and I pointed to him that, Hamilton struggled to do well in both 2009 and 2013. With a vastly improved car in the second half of 2009, the results came as expected. He could barely make an impact in the first half.

It's curious to see you reach those conclusions on how well someone did in "difficult circumstances". Further back, I think we've all established how important a good car is to win any race. If you don't have the car capable of winning, you won't win. Therefore, the only metric to determine if someone does well in difficult circumstance is what we perceive to be possible in that particular car. Either compared to his team mate or compared to what some deem possible/achievable.

In both cases, it's hard to make a point that Hamilton didn't do well. In 2009, he not only got pole positions and win races, he convincingly beat his team-mate who was struggling even more. Same applies to 2013 vs. Rosberg.

Vettels history of struggling with difficult cars comes from his performance in 2014 (Riccardo) and 2019/2020 (Leclerc). Schumacher with 2010 until 2012 when matched up against Rosberg.

Verstappen undoubtedly performs well in difficult circumstances and cars too (looking past the silly mistakes that led to crashes in his past). He significantly outperforms his team-mates by large margins, not unlike Hamilton.

How a driver performs in unpredictable circumstances (rain) is also a great way to gauge how adaptable a driver is. In this area, both Hamilton and Verstappen excel. Vettel has shown mixed results here.

[Wass85]

The point is, he struggled in 2009 compared to Vettel. That was the argument, not how many poles or how many wins he had. Jolle was talking about how Hamilton adapts well whereas Vettel and Schumacher struggled when things changed and I pointed to him that, Hamilton struggled to do well in both 2009 and 2013. With a vastly improved car in the second half of 2009, the results came as expected. He could barely make an impact in the first half.

It's curious to see you reach those conclusions on how well someone did in "difficult circumstances". Further back, I think we've all established how important a good car is to win any race. If you don't have the car capable of winning, you won't win. Therefore, the only metric to determine if someone does well in difficult circumstance is what we perceive to be possible in that particular car. Either compared to his team mate or compared to what some deem possible/achievable.

In both cases, it's hard to make a point that Hamilton didn't do well. In 2009, he not only got pole positions and win races, he convincingly beat his team-mate who was struggling even more. Same applies to 2013 vs. Rosberg.

Vettels history of struggling with difficult cars comes from his performance in 2014 (Riccardo) and 2019/2020 (Leclerc). Schumacher with 2010 until 2012 when matched up against Rosberg.

Verstappen undoubtedly performs well in difficult circumstances and cars too (looking past the silly mistakes that led to crashes in his past). He significantly outperforms his team-mates by large margins, not unlike Hamilton.

How a driver performs in unpredictable circumstances (rain) is also a great way to gauge how adaptable a driver is. In this area, both Hamilton and Verstappen excel. Vettel has shown mixed results here.

Funny how you say that, Hamilton was quite poor in the rain in 09. Didn't his teammate beat him at China?

[Wynters]

Hamilton has beaten three WDCs, all in their prime, who were driving the same equipment as him. Whilst I agree that it's all too common to see him undeservedly mythologised...name another driver on the grid over the last quarter-of-a-century that has done that? Or even close to that?

It's no coincidence that he's found himself in cars capable of winning races.

[dans79]

Funny how you say that, Hamilton was quite poor in the rain in 09. Didn't his teammate beat him at China?

This would have ended differently for a lot of other drivers, and it also shows some of the issues with the cars stability. That should be next to impossible in that turn!

[Moore77]

The point is, he struggled in 2009 compared to Vettel. That was the argument, not how many poles or how many wins he had. Jolle was talking about how Hamilton adapts well whereas Vettel and Schumacher struggled when things changed and I pointed to him that, Hamilton struggled to do well in both 2009 and 2013. With a vastly improved car in the second half of 2009, the results came as expected. He could barely make an impact in the first half.

In both cases, it's hard to make a point that Hamilton didn't do well. In 2009, he not only got pole positions and win races, he convincingly beat his team-mate who was struggling even more. Same applies to 2013 vs. Rosberg.

The point is, he didn't do anything notable for the whole of first half in 2009, when the car was at it's difficult stage. As the car improved in the second half, he did well. So, where is the question of adaptability under difficult conditions? He couldn't get a single pole in first half and then got 4 in the second. HIs team mate who had a disastrous first half, had a decent second half. That represents vastly improved car, not exactly the driver impact.

[Phil]

The point is, he didn't do anything notable for the whole of first half in 2009, when the car was at it's difficult stage.

Maybe to progress this discussion into something more constructive, why don't you tell us what you think Hamilton should have done to prove his over time and time proven adaptability in difficult cars and cirumstances?

We've already ruled out winning races and getting poles. That clearly wasn't on the table, not with the superior job of what Brawn had done.

You may be right about the car improving in the second half. But beating his team mate(s) consistently across the 13 years he has been driving in F1 paints a picture that indeed he has a talent that the others he has driven against lack. You may point to lack of wins and poles in the first half of 2009. I'll just point to him beating his team-mate across the board. The tally against Heiki that year 8-2 in races that they finished both. In fact, the difference was that large that Heiki wasn't retained beyond that year. What's more to say about 2009?

[Wass85]

Funny how you say that, Hamilton was quite poor in the rain in 09. Didn't his teammate beat him at China?

This would have ended differently for a lot of other drivers, and it also shows some of the issues with the cars stability. That should be next to impossible in that turn!

I'm not sure what that has got to do with his poor performance in the wet at China?

[Wass85]

Hamilton has beaten three WDCs, all in their prime, who were driving the same equipment as him. Whilst I agree that it's all too common to see him undeservedly mythologised...name another driver on the grid over the last quarter-of-a-century that has done that? Or even close to that?

It's no coincidence that he's found himself in cars capable of winning races.

Fernando Alonso?

[wesley123]

Other than reliability issues that hampered, in the remaining races where it worked well, what exactly was so astonishing about it? No driver can win if the car isn't capable of winning. In fact looking at the trend, the car started improving and he won with an improving car. Otherwise, there wasn't anything worth noting. So basically, he struggles when the car struggles. Same with any driver.

Just to be clear, you mean they are all bad drivers?

[Just_a_fan]

The point is, he struggled in 2009 compared to Vettel. That was the argument, not how many poles or how many wins he had. Jolle was talking about how Hamilton adapts well whereas Vettel and Schumacher struggled when things changed and I pointed to him that, Hamilton struggled to do well in both 2009 and 2013. With a vastly improved car in the second half of 2009, the results came as expected. He could barely make an impact in the first half.

Heck, even Kimi did well with a win. Trulli got a pole in Toyota, Fernando got a pole in Renault and Fisichella got one in Force India! They were much bigger achievements compared to a supremely well funded McLaren.

you missed the point. I didn't say Schumacher (and Vettel) struggled with a car, but with a new rule set.

2009 was a different rule set. 2013 was a different car (although same rules). Both times, Hamilton didn't make an impact.

Both times he beat his team mate who was driving the same machinery. In 2009 he did it very handsomely. In 2013, his team mate had just had three years of beating Schumacher in the same machinery so was fully embedded in the team, a team to which Hamilton was the newcomer. So pretty decent results really.

[Just_a_fan]

Hamilton has beaten three WDCs, all in their prime, who were driving the same equipment as him. Whilst I agree that it's all too common to see him undeservedly mythologised...name another driver on the grid over the last quarter-of-a-century that has done that? Or even close to that?

It's no coincidence that he's found himself in cars capable of winning races.

Fernando Alonso?

Alonso only beat one world champion in the same car and that was Button. That's just one.

[Wass85]

Hamilton has beaten three WDCs, all in their prime, who were driving the same equipment as him. Whilst I agree that it's all too common to see him undeservedly mythologised...name another driver on the grid over the last quarter-of-a-century that has done that? Or even close to that?

It's no coincidence that he's found himself in cars capable of winning races.

Fernando Alonso?

Alonso only beat one world champion in the same car and that was Button. That's just one.

You must have forgot Kimi and Villeneuve?

[dans79]

I'm not sure what that has got to do with his poor performance in the wet at China?

So you think a car thats aerodynamically unstable in the dry isn't going to be even worse in the wet?

And to be 100% clear, Lewis was running the new diffuser/aero package that was unstable, Heikki was running the older slower but morse stable package.