Michael Schumacher's arrogance
Patrick Santti
motivation to drive for Ferrari stems from a sense of competition rather
than a fat paycheck. He says that he would rather be seen as the best
driver battling with inferior machinery, than win easily with the
fastest car.
"I don't care about how many titles I win," the German is quoted as
saying. "It is more important how I win them. With the best car, you
have a situation where you can only lose the championship, not really
win it. If I win a title for Ferrari, it willl be very special for me."
---------------------------------------------------------------
It looks to me that he is already setting up Ferrari and it's fans for
another failed campaign this year. I am sure that all the designers,
engineers and mechanics that work for the team greatly appreciate the
notion that the only way their team can win races and the championship
is through the "superhuman" efforts of their star driver. I mean, how do
we really know if the Ferrari is that bad compared to the McLaren. And
is Schumacher really that good? It is so hard to tell because Schumacher
has always been matched with journeyman drivers like Eddie Irvine,
Johnny Herbert, Jos Verstappen and Riccardo Patrese throughout his
career. He has also always had undisputed number one status and
treatment at both Benetton and Ferrari.
What about this part about how important it is to him how he wins his
titles? Yeah, Adelaide 1994 and Jerez 1997 are fine examples of how
important perceptions are to him about how he wins his championships.
All of this is such pure rubbish. As a result of his comments, he is
attempting to discredit just about everybody who has ever won a
championship except himself. In his eyes, guys like Hakkinen, Villeneuve
and Hill could have been exchanged for just about anybody on the grid
and the title would have been won. Every driver from Prost to Mansell to
Senna to Lauda to Andretti to Stewart to Clark have all won
championships with superior machinery. Does that make them any less
worthy of the accolades and praise that has been showered on them? No.
There is so much more to a championship driver than merely driving the
car. He must also develop that car and work hard with the team to make
sure his is the best car on the grid. It is here that I suspect that
Schumacher is not as strong. I think a guy like Hill is a superior test
driver and he has the ability to communicate to his engineers and
mechanics what the car is doing and what needs to be done to improve it.
You only have to look at the job he has done with Jordan and Arrows to
realize that fact. Arrows wasn't nearly as strong last year without his
technical input and he has brought Jordan to new heights and their first
GP win. I believe that this was due in no small part to his persistent
efforts in improving a car that was very poor early in the season.
I get so tired at reading disingenuous comments such as his. To me,
there is no reason why Ferrari shouldn't win a title. They probably have
the largest budget in F1, state-of-the-art facilities and a talented
group of championship-caliber designers and engineers. I think the
driver made too many mistakes last year and if he had been as perfect as
he makes himself out to be, the title would have gone to Italy last
year. Ferrari gave him a very reliable and fast car last year. The $25
million-a-year man was the one who really dropped the ball last year...
Patrick
Bob Helland
Patrick Santti wrote in message
<2904-36B...@newsd-162.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
I say they lost the title in the first two races last year.
This year they should get out of the gate quicker and the rest will be
history.
FORZA!!
Bob
CD'A
>Michael Schumacher said in an interview with Autosport that his
>motivation to drive for Ferrari stems from a sense of competition rather
>than a fat paycheck. He says that he would rather be seen as the best
>driver battling with inferior machinery, than win easily with the
>fastest car.
>"I don't care about how many titles I win," the German is quoted as
>saying. "It is more important how I win them. With the best car, you
>have a situation where you can only lose the championship, not really
>win it. If I win a title for Ferrari, it willl be very special for me."
snnipage
>There is so much more to a championship driver than merely driving the
>car. He must also develop that car and work hard with the team to make
>sure his is the best car on the grid.
more snnipage
>Patrick
Can't agree more. He is always playing with words and using psychological
games. That's where he is really good. His fan club claims Michael
Schumacher brought (developed) Benneton to be a manufacturers' champion. Now,
how is it that after more years than the years he spent at Benneton he still
claims the Ferrari is an inferior car? Something is a-miss here.
I still think Schumacher must be a good driver and car developer. But, in
reality, "good" must not be interpreted as "best" in the present conjuncture
or perhaps in any conjuncture. I'm thinking here that the Benneton of few
years back must have been a heck of a car. Anyway, Schumacher definetely
sells his product very well. He can down play the Ferrari and still be
loved by the Ferrari fans (except me and perhaps a few others). He can down
play the Ferrari and still be called the best car developer. He can win on
very "gray" ciscumstances and still be called the best. Or is it all the work
of his manager, Willy Weber. Who, by the way, has kept Ralf in good teams
despite many mishaps Ralf may have caused by his own inabilities. Hell,
people like to place superhuman attributes in people anyway. Isn't Jesus a
god and isn't Elvis almost there? Everyone should know, and I'm declaring
this now for the eternity of F1 fans to come: there's only one god and his
name is Senna.
César
Kevlar
>In article <2904-36B...@newsd-162.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
SANT...@webtv.net
<almost everything snipped brutely away>
...WAS Senna
I thought gods couldn't die. Or is he still here, like Elvis? Driving a
serious underweight car...
Dave Green
>
>Michael Schumacher said in an interview with Autosport that his
>motivation to drive for Ferrari stems from a sense of competition rather
>than a fat paycheck. He says that he would rather be seen as the best
>driver battling with inferior machinery, than win easily with the
>fastest car.
>
>"I don't care about how many titles I win," the German is quoted as
>saying. "It is more important how I win them. With the best car, you
>have a situation where you can only lose the championship, not really
>win it. If I win a title for Ferrari, it willl be very special for me."
You missed out the best bit:
"To win the '97 title in a Williams, which was generally acknowledged to be
the best car, would not have meant anything to me."
Which is obviously a slap in the face for Villeneuve. Does the evil Michael
Shoelacer think JV's BAR will be strong enough this season to warrant such
psychology so early in the campaign?
There's really no need, the BAR car's reliability problems will cause
Jacques more worries than such taunts from the arrogant German.
How one man can have soiled one teams image as much a Schumacher has done at
Ferrari is beyond belief.
Kind regards,
Dave.
Ford Prefect
<david....@REMOVElineone.net> wrote:
>Patrick Santti wrote:
>>
>>Michael Schumacher said in an interview with Autosport that his
>>motivation to drive for Ferrari stems from a sense of competition rather
>>than a fat paycheck. He says that he would rather be seen as the best
>>driver battling with inferior machinery, than win easily with the
>>fastest car.
>>
>>"I don't care about how many titles I win," the German is quoted as
>>saying. "It is more important how I win them. With the best car, you
>>have a situation where you can only lose the championship, not really
>>win it. If I win a title for Ferrari, it willl be very special for me."
>
>You missed out the best bit:
>
>"To win the '97 title in a Williams, which was generally acknowledged to be
>the best car, would not have meant anything to me."
>
>Which is obviously a slap in the face for Villeneuve. Does the evil Michael
>Shoelacer think JV's BAR will be strong enough this season to warrant such
>psychology so early in the campaign?
Could be a slap in Frentzen's face. Maybe he's trying to suggest
Frentzen ain't up to much. He could have said that about Hill in '96,
which I'd have thought he would have been more likely to.
>There's really no need, the BAR car's reliability problems will cause
>Jacques more worries than such taunts from the arrogant German.
>
>How one man can have soiled one teams image as much a Schumacher has done at
>Ferrari is beyond belief.
He takes home a quarter of Ferrari's annual budget. If he can't handle
the challenge of winning in a lesser car then maybe he should take a
pay cut, allow Ferrari to spend more on the car and forget the
challenge for the sake of the Tifosi.
If I were Jean Todt I'd get rid of the man now, or at least threaten
to. Where else is Schumi going to get the kind of salaray he's now on?
>Kind regards,
>
>Dave.
joe
Bartus Garoulaitis
Patrick Santti wrote in message <2904-36B0A41C-48@newsd-.
<snipped 10 minutes of reading>
Right, in other words scummy is an asshole, right
Bartus(who needs less time to come to a conclusion)
brobbo
driver. It's just a damn shame that he is such an ass hole on and off the
track. He truly could aspire to be one of the greats, instead his memory
will only extend to "the prick who won few races". And it is that, which
makes him second to those like Sena, J. Stewart, Mansel, Hill, JV etc etc.
Patrick Santti wrote in message
Michael Schumacher said in an interview with Autosport that his
motivation to drive for Ferrari stems from a sense of competition rather
than a fat paycheck. He says that he would rather be seen as the best
driver battling with inferior machinery, than win easily with the
fastest car.
"I don't care about how many titles I win," the German is quoted as
saying. "It is more important how I win them. With the best car, you
have a situation where you can only lose the championship, not really
win it. If I win a title for Ferrari, it willl be very special for me."
---------------------------------------------------------------
It looks to me that he is already setting up Ferrari and it's fans for
another failed campaign this year. I am sure that all the designers,
engineers and mechanics that work for the team greatly appreciate the
notion that the only way their team can win races and the championship
is through the "superhuman" efforts of their star driver. I mean, how do
we really know if the Ferrari is that bad compared to the McLaren. And
is Schumacher really that good? It is so hard to tell because Schumacher
has always been matched with journeyman drivers like Eddie Irvine,
Johnny Herbert, Jos Verstappen and Riccardo Patrese throughout his
career. He has also always had undisputed number one status and
treatment at both Benetton and Ferrari.
What about this part about how important it is to him how he wins his
titles? Yeah, Adelaide 1994 and Jerez 1997 are fine examples of how
important perceptions are to him about how he wins his championships.
All of this is such pure rubbish. As a result of his comments, he is
attempting to discredit just about everybody who has ever won a
championship except himself. In his eyes, guys like Hakkinen, Villeneuve
and Hill could have been exchanged for just about anybody on the grid
and the title would have been won. Every driver from Prost to Mansell to
Senna to Lauda to Andretti to Stewart to Clark have all won
championships with superior machinery. Does that make them any less
worthy of the accolades and praise that has been showered on them? No.
There is so much more to a championship driver than merely driving the
car. He must also develop that car and work hard with the team to make
Patrick Santti
teammates who have managed to score the sum total of two GP races
between them, and Herbert (no disrespect intended) basically inherited
both wins through attrition. I mean, I just cannot accept how he slags
off guys like Damon Hill or Jacques Villeneuve while we are somehow
supposed to feel that the teammates he has had over the years are
superior drivers then these two fine champions.
I do know a lot about Michael Schumacher. He is an amazing talent behind
the wheel of a race car (certainly one of the best of all time),
although his social skills and sportsmanship leave much to be desired.
It is just that he makes it sound like he is trying to win races and the
championship in a Minardi. The Ferrari, in my estimation, was a very
good car last year. It was much more reliable than the McLaren and it
was a pretty fast car at the same time. I was given the impression that
Ferrari hired the guy because he is the kind of driver who can win
championships in inferior equipment. If the Ferrari is relatively close,
then Schumacher will make up the difference through the use of his
vastly superior skills - so the logic goes. In my opinion, I really feel
that the tools were there for Schumacher to win the title last year, but
there were simply too many mistakes on his behalf to allow that to
happen. Is this being overly critical? Maybe, but he is being paid
probably three to four times as much as any other driver on the grid.
Such a sum is a little much to be paid for some pretty stupid mistakes
like Spa.
Michael Schumacher is always trying to portray himself as the underdog.
He has now had three years to turn Ferrari into a championship winning
team. The combination of a driver like Schumacher and the design and
engineering talents like Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn should have yielded
the big prize by now. It hasn't, so one has to wonder why the title has
elluded them. One now must question whether the Benettons in which
Schumacher scored his two championships were truly inferior cars as the
popular opinion has seemed to be.
Patrick
M. Wells
None of which is reflected in simply stating that winning a race or
championship in superior technology is boring as hell. What he said was
winning races as the underdog is much more rewarding. The fact is, that
applies to basically everything.
I don't think you know much about Schumacher by saying he's never driven
with a worthy team mate. Irvine is no slouch. Martin Brundle (1992 Benetton
season) was no slouch. Johnny Herbert (1995 Benetton season) was no slouch.
Schumacher made the Silver Arrows Mercedes team at 19(?), the most
prestigious Mercedes racing effort at the time. Sorry, not made, but chosen
along with Frentzen and Wendlinger.
--
M. Wells
Patrick Santti <SANT...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:2904-36B...@newsd-162.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Brendan Andrews
Santti says...
<snip>
> It is so hard to tell because Schumacher
> has always been matched with journeyman drivers like Eddie Irvine,
> Johnny Herbert, Jos Verstappen and Riccardo Patrese throughout his
> career.
Eddie is no journeyman. Autocourse top ten puts him ahead all but MS, MH
and JV. I use that to try to prevent accusations of bias. You also
omitted Nelson Piquet. He can after all only outpace the teammate he has.
One Mr Senna vetoed potential teammates on occasion.
There is in fact a great shortage of people who would be game to be
potentially buried by being his teammate. Eddie has guts, pace and after
last season - demonstrable consistency.
The tactic of criticising MS by belittling his teammate is overused, and
simply inaccurate and ineffective, because he has always been better than
his teammate, what more can he do?
--
Brendan Andrews - Brisbane, Australia
(Please remove underscores when replying)
Alain D.
>I find it interesting that you manage to come up with the names of
three
>teammates who have managed to score the sum total of two GP races
>between them, and Herbert (no disrespect intended) basically
inherited
>both wins through attrition. I mean, I just cannot accept how he
slags
>off guys like Damon Hill or Jacques Villeneuve while we are somehow
>supposed to feel that the teammates he has had over the years are
>superior drivers then these two fine champions.
Answer this: how long do you think it would take Villeneuve to win a
championship in a Ferrari, given the same support and budget as
Michael Schumacher? He won at his second year in CART in a car that
was basically a clone of at least half a dozen other cars. And he won
at his second year in a car that wasn't that superior to the Ferrari,
especially from the middle of the season, despite being heavily
penalized by the FIA, despite loosing many points due to poor team
strategies and despite many a comedy of errors in the pitlane...
>I do know a lot about Michael Schumacher. He is an amazing talent
behind
>the wheel of a race car (certainly one of the best of all time),
His natural talent is spoiled by his self-centered personality and his
propension at over-reacting or choking under extreme pressure. Why is
he generally so fast under normal circumstances (or even under the
rain)? Because he's entirely focused on his own driving, to the point
of losing all objectivity. He is totally subjective and self-centered,
he doesn't drive seeing what the opponent might or will do. That's how
Villeneuve got him. That's how he threw away a certain victory in Spa.
Pretty bad flaw for someone who's being painted as the best of all
times.
>although his social skills and sportsmanship leave much to be
desired.
... and that's putting it mildly...
>It is just that he makes it sound like he is trying to win races and
the
When Schumacher came to Ferrari, he brought along practically all "his
people", people who helped him win with Benetton. Ferrari (Fiat and
Marlboro) added their millions, hired some of the best minds out there
and three years later Schumacher claims he's driving inferior
equipment. Excuse me but this is bull... Ferrari now has the best car
out there, equaled only by McLaren, and the Scuderia will most likely,
at last, get the title but *with the best car*, just like Williams and
McLaren won it with the best car. The only difference being that
Williams' last two championships were also won with the best driver,
each of these years, as was also the case this year with McLaren.
>One now must question whether the Benettons in which
>Schumacher scored his two championships were truly inferior cars as
the
>popular opinion has seemed to be.
That was Berger's opinion, trying to save his ass and Benetton's
(Briatore's?) reputation by making a God out of the previous driver.
In '94 Benetton came-up with a good chassis design and the Ford engine
that had won the last three races of 1993 and the second spot with the
McLaren-Ford driven by Senna landing the second spot in the WC. Ford
poured in a lot of cash and brain-power to keep the engine competitive
to the end of '94. In '95 Benetton had the evolution of the same
excellent chassis, plus the engine that would turn out to be the best
of all times and some of the best technicians to go along with it, so,
how could this car have been so bad?
Alain D.
Christian Ehrnrooth
>
> One Mr Senna vetoed potential teammates on occasion.
>
chose Johnny Dumfries over Derek Warwick and not because he was scared
of the competition, but because he knew the team couldn't afford to give
equal treatment to both drivers. Warwick wouldn't have agreed on a
number two status which Dumfries did.
X-ian (still missing Lotus)
Finland
eric e weinraub
Any other driver make's Schuey's comments, and he'd be considered a
real hero for choosing to be a great driver insteead of just
steamrolling the competition in a car like last year's McLaren.
Your comments aside, Schuey gets plenty of comments from folks who you
would think weould be his detractors ie Jackie Steward and Frank
Williams.
--
Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a rock.
Patrick Santti
he was the same driver that won 23 GPs and three championships. They
also were only paired for a handful of races during the 1991 season. As
a young driver, I am sure Schumacher had a lot more motivation and
committment than Nelson had at that stage, particularly in qualifying.
I'd have to check the qualifying and race results, but I seem to recall
that they were reasonably close.
I don't think that the Autocourse driver ratings are anything to hang
your hat on. It is very subjective and it is so hard to compare the
relative merits of different drivers when they aren't in the same
equipment. I am just not sold on Eddie Irvine being a top level driver.
Schumacher has won about a dozen races at Ferrari since he arrived there
in 1996. You would think that if Irvine is as good as some of you make
him out to be, he would have managed to win at least one GP by now. Do
you really believe that Villeneuve, Hill or Hakkinen would still be
looking for that first win if they were driving for Ferrari? I mean,
Damon won a race in an inferior Jordan and by all rights should have won
a race in an ARROWS! Personally, I think the Ferraris are much better
now than they were in the Berger/Alesi days and both those guys managed
to win races. When is Eddie going to do the business, as they say?
As somebody else in this thread pointed out, Schumacher brought over a
lot of the most important cogs in the Benetton gang that helped him to
his two titles. He has been given all of the support that a driver can
ask for. Most drivers don't get their say in so many personnel
decisions, but Ferrari has basically catered to his every whim. The
entire team is behind him and they have dedicated themselves to the
cause of making Michael Schumacher champion again. I dare say that
winning the driver's championship is a far greater priority for them
then winning the team championship, such is the focus on their star
driver. I just don't think that Schumacher has any excuses if he doesn't
come away with the goods in 1999. Everything is there for him, so he
needs to get on with it. If he doesn't manage to win it this year, I
think Ferrari has to look at going in a different direction in the
future. $25 million is a lot of money to pay a driver who can't get the
job done. They are paying him that much money to win the championship -
not to win finish second.
Patrick
Mark J. Frusciante
>You guys should try standing up relieve the circulation to your brains.
>Any other driver make's Schuey's comments, and he'd be considered a
>real hero for choosing to be a great driver insteead of just
>steamrolling the competition in a car like last year's McLaren.
Oh dear... A voice of reason.
You will be crushed with dung.
Mark
http://www.pipeline.com/~opus
Remove Before Flight.
Patrick Santti
don't blindly accept the notion that the only reason Ferrari wins races
these days is because of the talents of Michael Schumacher. I just don't
buy into the "Schumi! Schumi!" crowd who wants us all to believe that
their hero is winning races and challenging for championships in a
mid-field car. Even Irvine showed that he could outqualify the McLarens
on occasion. The Ferrari was the second best car last year (by far) and
it was easily the most reliable car on the grid. As I stated before, I
thought that given a car that was reasonably competitive (which the
Ferrari was), the talents of Michael Schumacher were supposed to make up
the difference. They haven't.
Schumacher's stance is all very noble, but I just don't buy every word
he is saying. First of all, he would not be making $25 million a year
driving for McLaren. He would be lucky to get half that amount. As long
as he can perpetuate this myth that he is driving vastly inferior
equipment, his image of being the best driver in the world will remain
intact and his value will continue to be high. It's just that I have a
hard time trying to sympathize wih a guy who is paid a wage that is so
far in excess of all his peers. Then he wants to grab credit for being
so unselfish that he will sacrifice winning more races and titles to
drive for a "second class" outfit like Ferrari. I mean, please... I'm
not sure that kind of position makes him worthy of any kind of hero
worship. He's taking the money after all. And what an obscenely large
haul it is.
If he hadn't driven like such an idiot at Monaco, not stuffed it up
Coulthard's backside at Spa and not screwed the pooch in Austria - the
title would have been his. End of story. The wunderkind is not
infallible...
Patrick
Mark J. Frusciante
[yawn]
>If he hadn't driven like such an idiot at Monaco, not stuffed it up
>Coulthard's backside at Spa and not screwed the pooch in Austria - the
>title would have been his. End of story. The wunderkind is not
>infallible...
That's OK, Pumpkin; We'll always have *you* to look up to...
Ford Prefect
J. Frusciante) wrote:
>SANT...@webtv.net (Patrick Santti) wrote:
>[yawn]
>>If he hadn't driven like such an idiot at Monaco, not stuffed it up
>>Coulthard's backside at Spa and not screwed the pooch in Austria - the
>>title would have been his. End of story. The wunderkind is not
>>infallible...
>
>That's OK, Pumpkin; We'll always have *you* to look up to...
Mark, stop talking to yourself.
Mark J. Frusciante
>There is nothing wrong with my thought process on this matter.
Jacques Villeneuve says [we will win the championship this year] and
that's "cautious optimism"; Schumacher says [I'd rather work to win than
do it on cruise control], and that's "unbearable arrogance".
I'd say there's *no* thought process on this matter.
You do the math, Pookie.
André Prégent
Mark J. Frusciante wrote in message <36b51aeb...@news.pipeline.com>...
>SANT...@webtv.net (Patrick Santti) wrote:
>>There is nothing wrong with my thought process on this matter.
>[...]
>
>Jacques Villeneuve says [we will win the championship this year] and
>that's "cautious optimism"; Schumacher says [I'd rather work to win than
>do it on cruise control], and that's "unbearable arrogance".
>
finish tenth."
I happen to agree....
Patrick Santti
I always thought MJF's loyalties were with Ferrari first, rather than
any particular driver. What I think I have been pointing out all along
is that Ferrari is good enough to win the championship and that the
drivers have let them down. Maybe if you actually read what I have
posted, Mark, you would realize that. Maybe you just hate to be reminded
that McLaren won the title in 1998 and not Ferrari. Or maybe you just
hate to be reminded of what really happened at Spa.
I have never said that I am better than anybody or that I should be
looked up to. I think that I do post reasonable observations about
things. What I see is that Schumacher has come up short in the title
race for three years running and I think that some serious questions
need to be asked as to why that is. 1998 was supposed to be Ferrari's
year - no excuses. It didn't happen, and I think people have a right to
be critical of the way things have been done under the Schumacher regime
at Ferrari.
I think the observations that I have made are far more intelligent and
relevant than the mindless bashing of a certain Frank Williams that MJF
seems to take a certain interest in partaking at every given
opportunity. So what if he made a mistake in his life that left him
paralyzed? I don't hear him whining and moaning about his plight. He
simply moved on from that and dedicated himself to being the best F1
team owner he could be. And before I am accused of looking upon the man
as a saint or god (and no human being can really be either), I would
like to say only that I respect the man for his abilities and talents he
has shown in the area of motorsport. He has built a team that has
accomplished a great deal and I would think that any real fan of the
sport would respect him for that. It is very clear to me that such
attacks derive from a painfully obvious agenda and doing so only makes
MJF look like the jealous Ferrari fan that he so clearly is. Grow up
already, Mark. You need to learn to be a better sport about things. If
you can't stand to see your favorite driver and team lose year in and
year out, than move on to something that will not cause you to become so
emotional and irrational. It is only a sport, after all.
Patrick
CD'A
Mark distorted things a little "this" time. And I agree with you - if one
doesn't aim to win, a podium finish they will not get. And Michael only said
he was not going to win to comfort himself from not winning last time after
saying he had a chance to win (uh?). Michael has this thing about what he
says and all. I think he is a very superstitious person and is afraid of
having his chances "jinxed." But since he is talking about "chances" and not
winning, all he's gotta get at the end of the year are chances.
César
Guy
shuey is a good driver, he by no means is the best and maybe even not a
great driver. He's proven time and time again that he is reckless, careless
and has no respect for other drivers while he is on the course or in front
of a camera. I just keep wondering why Ferrari keeps him on the payroll. He
does keep finishing on the podium, but geesh, after so many years with no
championship something's gotta change, and its not the car.
Guy
Patrick Santti wrote in message
<7756-36B...@newsd-161.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
There is nothing wrong with my thought process on this matter. I just
don't blindly accept the notion that the only reason Ferrari wins races
these days is because of the talents of Michael Schumacher. I just don't
buy into the "Schumi! Schumi!" crowd who wants us all to believe that
their hero is winning races and challenging for championships in a
mid-field car. Even Irvine showed that he could outqualify the McLarens
on occasion. The Ferrari was the second best car last year (by far) and
it was easily the most reliable car on the grid. As I stated before, I
thought that given a car that was reasonably competitive (which the
Ferrari was), the talents of Michael Schumacher were supposed to make up
the difference. They haven't.
Schumacher's stance is all very noble, but I just don't buy every word
he is saying. First of all, he would not be making $25 million a year
driving for McLaren. He would be lucky to get half that amount. As long
as he can perpetuate this myth that he is driving vastly inferior
equipment, his image of being the best driver in the world will remain
intact and his value will continue to be high. It's just that I have a
hard time trying to sympathize wih a guy who is paid a wage that is so
far in excess of all his peers. Then he wants to grab credit for being
so unselfish that he will sacrifice winning more races and titles to
drive for a "second class" outfit like Ferrari. I mean, please... I'm
not sure that kind of position makes him worthy of any kind of hero
worship. He's taking the money after all. And what an obscenely large
haul it is.
If he hadn't driven like such an idiot at Monaco, not stuffed it up
Coulthard's backside at Spa and not screwed the pooch in Austria - the
title would have been his. End of story. The wunderkind is not
infallible...
Patrick
Patrick Santti
said. You have to remember that a lot of pretty optimisic things are
said when teams launch their new cars. There are sponsors to please and
a lot of media people with cameras and microphones gathered around.
Those really aren't the places where people will get the real story from
a driver.
I certainly didn't expect you to address the issue I have with your
personal vendetta against Frank Williams. What's the deal there? Did he
smash the hopes of Ferrari just a few too many times? Why do you despise
him so much?
I can't help you if you can't see arrogance when it is staring you
directly in the face, Mark. Michael Scumacher just oozes with it and I
am not the only person who holds this opinion. A lot of drivers are a
bit conceited and arrogant - it goes with the territory. He just takes
it to an entirely other level.
I definitelty agree with the person who wonders whether Schumacher is a
bit superstitious. Lately, he never seems to want to come out and say
that he has a good chance to win a particular race or championship. He
generally downplays his chances and says how difficult it will be. Then
when he wins, his devoted followers praise him for how great he was in
hauling that red piece of rubbish to the top of the podium. Give me a
break. It seems as though his best win was always his last one and his
greatest win will be the one that follows. Yeah, right...
Patrick
Alain D.
>Jacques Villeneuve says [we will win the championship this year] and
>that's "cautious optimism"; Schumacher says [I'd rather work to win
than
>do it on cruise control], and that's "unbearable arrogance".
Villeneuve never said "we will win the championship this year". He
put his carreer on the line, invested his own money in a new team (he
owns 20%) and says "we can dream"... Well, for that kind of money I
sure hope you can dream... As for Schumacher, no one here is
questionning his efforts, just his tendency to screw up under pressure
and his stupid comments about Ferrari being "inferior". Maybe he ought
to consider cruise control...
Alain D.
M. Wells
treat. Go to a race and see for yourself. I'm a fan of Schumacher on the
track in any car. I'll even argue that he doesn't choke under pressure, like
some people say. But what he does or says off the track, I don't really
care, that's his business, and the same applies to every driver.
--
M. Wells
Patrick Santti <SANT...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:2986-36B...@newsd-163.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
>I find it interesting that you manage to come up with the names of three
>teammates who have managed to score the sum total of two GP races
>between them, and Herbert (no disrespect intended) basically inherited
>both wins through attrition. I mean, I just cannot accept how he slags
>off guys like Damon Hill or Jacques Villeneuve while we are somehow
>supposed to feel that the teammates he has had over the years are
>superior drivers then these two fine champions.
>
>I do know a lot about Michael Schumacher. He is an amazing talent behind
>the wheel of a race car (certainly one of the best of all time),
>although his social skills and sportsmanship leave much to be desired.
>It is just that he makes it sound like he is trying to win races and the
>championship in a Minardi. The Ferrari, in my estimation, was a very
>good car last year. It was much more reliable than the McLaren and it
>was a pretty fast car at the same time. I was given the impression that
>Ferrari hired the guy because he is the kind of driver who can win
>championships in inferior equipment. If the Ferrari is relatively close,
>then Schumacher will make up the difference through the use of his
>vastly superior skills - so the logic goes. In my opinion, I really feel
>that the tools were there for Schumacher to win the title last year, but
>there were simply too many mistakes on his behalf to allow that to
>happen. Is this being overly critical? Maybe, but he is being paid
>probably three to four times as much as any other driver on the grid.
>Such a sum is a little much to be paid for some pretty stupid mistakes
>like Spa.
>
>Michael Schumacher is always trying to portray himself as the underdog.
>He has now had three years to turn Ferrari into a championship winning
>team. The combination of a driver like Schumacher and the design and
>engineering talents like Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn should have yielded
>the big prize by now. It hasn't, so one has to wonder why the title has
>elluded them. One now must question whether the Benettons in which
>Schumacher scored his two championships were truly inferior cars as the
>popular opinion has seemed to be.
>
>Patrick
>
Philip Hill
> >Coulthard's backside at Spa and not screwed the pooch in Austria - the
> >title would have been his. End of story. The wunderkind is not
> >infallible...
>
Another well reasoned over long reply.
>
> Mark
> http://www.pipeline.com/~opus
>
> Remove Before Flight.
--
Badfysh
drives for them.
Sebastjan Videc
clutch...
--
--
Sebastjan Videc [sebastj...@NOSPAMuni-mb.si ] => remove NOSPAM
[... It's full of stars ...] [... Let Light Surround You ...] ICQ
#19417710
M. Wells wrote in message <78tlef$8i4$1...@bertrand.ccs.carleton.ca>...
M. Wells
--
M. Wells
Sebastjan Videc <sebastj...@uni-mb.si> wrote in message
news:78uqgm$orl$1...@strelovod.uni-mb.si...
Alain D.
>Let's hear it? And it's "choked."
*You* say it! Here's a hint: he "choked" his engine...
:o)
Actually you're right, I've been thinking about it and my depiction of
MS as a chocker is incorrect. I think his behaviour under pressure
could better be described as someone trying to do too much, more than
necessary, loosing sight of the task at hand, with "phenomenal"
(catastrophic) results, as demonstrated in Spa, and numerous times at
race starts. I believe "overkilling" could adequatly describe what
he's doing. Like a gymnast or a figure skater who does a routine 100
times without a fault in training but finds new ways of screwing-up in
competion, in public, when it counts...
Any sports psychologists out there? Michael could use your services...
Alain D.
Alain D.
I think you meant "McLaren is damn lucky he drives for Ferrari"...
Alain D.
Badfysh
If shumacher drove a McLaren with Hakinnen last year, who would u suppose won
the title?
mark jeangerard
find that all your dreams of being World Champion have been pierced through
the skull. Unless he put himself in the lesser car, his wins would have been
hollow victory. When JV, MH, and DH are lying on thier deathbeds they will
know they have failed. These years have been without competition. At least
this way MS might have a chance at being the hero who helped to revive the
great, historic Prancing Horse.
And he is "superhuman". The guy is a machine. He is spot on and since he's
joined F1 I've only seen him crack once. (Of course, I've been watching most
of the races from TV.)
--
"Actually, his driving style didn't exist. He didn't really have one. At the
end of the day, when it was time for qualifying, he tailored his driving
style to the problems of his car. And he'd put it on pole."
(Gerhard Berger)
mark
Patrick Santti wrote in message
<2904-36B...@newsd-162.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Tom Cosgrave
mark jeangerard wrote in message <791494$pu8$1...@hume.nmia.com>...
>
>And he is "superhuman". The guy is a machine. He is spot on and since he's
>joined F1 I've only seen him crack once. (Of course, I've been watching
most
>of the races from TV.)
He's cracked a lot more than once.
1994 - Australia
1996 - Monaco
1997 - Collision with JV
1998 - Spa
1998 - Nurburgring
1998 - Suzuka
Tom
--
Tom Cosgrave The Corrs Links Page
t...@indigo.ie http://www.thecorrs.org/links
Cognito Cognito, Ergo, Cognito Sum
Alain D.
>If shumacher drove a McLaren with Hakinnen last year, who would u
suppose won
>the title?
Villeneuve, because Villeneuve would've been driving a Ferrari.
Alain D.
Ian Hill
>
> He's cracked a lot more than once.
>
> 1994 - Australia
> 1996 - Monaco
> 1997 - Collision with JV
> 1998 - Spa
> 1998 - Nurburgring
> 1998 - Suzuka
I don't count Nurburgring 98 as "cracking" - he was just beaten fair and
square by a better driver/team/car/strategy combination.
As for Spa - sure, it was his mistake, but he wasn't under pressure so I
wouldn't say he "cracked" then either. All the others I agree with.
--
Ian Hill, Cambridge, UK Email: ij...@cam.ac.uk
http://members.xoom.com/IanHill http://members.tripod.com/~IanHill
"If you don't like your job, you don't strike; you go in every day and
do it really half-assed. That's the American way." - Homer Simpson
Tom Cosgrave
Ian Hill wrote in message <36B481...@cam.ac.uk>...
>
>I don't count Nurburgring 98 as "cracking" - he was just beaten fair and
>square by a better driver/team/car/strategy combination.
Okay fair enough.
>As for Spa - sure, it was his mistake, but he wasn't under pressure so I
>wouldn't say he "cracked" then either. All the others I agree with.
You don't think he cracked by going ape in the pits? :-) Wow, I'm impressed.
Ian Hill
>
> Ian Hill wrote in message <36B481...@cam.ac.uk>...
> >
> >I don't count Nurburgring 98 as "cracking" - he was just beaten fair and
> >square by a better driver/team/car/strategy combination.
>
> Okay fair enough.
>
> >As for Spa - sure, it was his mistake, but he wasn't under pressure so I
> >wouldn't say he "cracked" then either. All the others I agree with.
>
> You don't think he cracked by going ape in the pits? :-) Wow, I'm impressed.
Oh yes, that. I thought you were talking about cracking while sitting in the
car. :-)
Tom Cosgrave
Ian Hill wrote in message <36B489...@cam.ac.uk>...
>
>Oh yes, that. I thought you were talking about cracking while sitting in
the
>car. :-)
No :-)
Prepack
>Alain D. retorted
LOL nice one al !!! ;-)
prepack
M. Wells
--
M. Wells
Tom Cosgrave <t...@indigo.ie> wrote in message
news:diZs2.193$1w4...@news.indigo.ie...
>
>mark jeangerard wrote in message <791494$pu8$1...@hume.nmia.com>...
>>
>>And he is "superhuman". The guy is a machine. He is spot on and since he's
>>joined F1 I've only seen him crack once. (Of course, I've been watching
>most
>>of the races from TV.)
>
>
>He's cracked a lot more than once.
>
>1994 - Australia
>1996 - Monaco
It was raining, he was in second place, and slid off into the wall. Not the
first. (did JV choke in Montreal '97? Not at all. He lulled himself into a
false sense of security and lost concentration, enough to lose control of
the car.)
>1997 - Collision with JV
Deliberately rammed his car into JV.
>1998 - Spa
260km/h in blinding mist. That's choking? Do you think he would've hit him
if he could see? Try it some time. On second thought, don't.
>1998 - Nurburgring
Can't recall that incident off hand.
>1998 - Suzuka
What? Stalling? Or running over debris and cutting down a tire? The first
was mechanical (it's push button remember), the second was unfortunate, but
didn't matter anyway.
Alain D.
>That's a pretty generous definition of the term cracked. ;-)
>>1997 - Collision with JV
>Deliberately rammed his car into JV.
... instead of racing him. His move on JV was a desperate move, when
there was no reason for despair. He could've hanged on to him, he
still had 22 more laps to pass him... Maybe you won't call this
"cracking under pressure". Fine. Let's just call it "behaving
erratically"...
>>1998 - Spa
>
>260km/h in blinding mist. That's choking? Do you think he would've
hit him
>if he could see? Try it some time. On second thought, don't.
Why the hell did he need to drive at 260km/h in a blinding mist for at
all? I think the mist is still blinding a lot of Schumacher's fans.
The guy didn't have to push that much anymore but, hey, he had to lap
everybody just make absolutely sure he would humiliate everyone and go
down in the record books as the one and only champion on a wet
track... why? why? why? He totally lost perspective of what he had to
do: just slowly get close to Coulthard, keep following him, let the
marshalls wave the blue flag and the black flag if it became
necessary, safely pass where he could actually see him, win the race,
collect 10 pts. and win the WC. OK, maybe we should'nt call this
"cracking", let's just say he was "behaving erratically"...
>>1998 - Nurburgring
>Can't recall that incident off hand.
Me neither... maybe nothing happened??? Was there a race at all?
Maybe we were abducted... ;o)
>>1998 - Suzuka
>What? Stalling? Or running over debris and cutting down a tire? The
first
>was mechanical (it's push button remember), the second was
unfortunate, but
>didn't matter anyway.
Tell me about this button. I'm curious. Because the button seemed to
work fine after everybody had passed him on the grid and for the rest
of the race, on restart and in the pits. Do you mean to say that
Schumacher can't be held responsible for stalling on the starting grid
at the last race of the season, after spending hours and millions
getting ready for this one race, this one, last, desperate attempt at
catching Hakkinen and clinching this elusive WC? When every
possibility had been investigated, right down to what teammates would
or should do? That it's all because of this stupid button? That
Schumacher had nothing to do with it? I must have missed something.
Must be those aliens again...
Alain D.
mark jeangerard
--
Tom Cosgrave wrote in message ...
mark jeangerard wrote in message <791494$pu8$1...@hume.nmia.com>...
>
>And he is "superhuman". The guy is a machine. He is spot on and since he's
>joined F1 I've only seen him crack once. (Of course, I've been watching
most
>of the races from TV.)
He's cracked a lot more than once.
1994 - Australia
1996 - Monaco
1997 - Collision with JV
1998 - Spa
1998 - Nurburgring
1998 - Suzuka
Dab
to
>find that all your dreams of being World Champion have been pierced through
>the skull. Unless he put himself in the lesser car, his wins would have
been
>hollow victory. When JV, MH, and DH are lying on thier deathbeds they will
>know they have failed. These years have been without competition. At least
>this way MS might have a chance at being the hero who helped to revive the
>great, historic Prancing Horse.
>
>joined F1 I've only seen him crack once.
???????????????
Dab
Tom Cosgrave wrote in message ...
>
>most
>>of the races from TV.)
>
>
>He's cracked a lot more than once.
>
>1994 - Australia
>1996 - Monaco
>1997 - Collision with JV
>1998 - Spa
>1998 - Nurburgring
>1998 - Suzuka
Don't forget 1998 Monaco...
M. Wells
six inches, and then nothing. The gear grabs, and jerks the car forward. The
clutch is electronic. You press the lever and that's it. It pulls the
friction plate away and then first gear is engaged. In this case, 1st was
engaged but the clutch was still somewhat in. And that's not a driver error.
It's gremlin, and can be overcome if you're expecting it, that stayed the
course of the race.
Alain D. <al...@cactus.com> wrote in message
news:P96t2.87$C53...@wagner.videotron.net...
David Betts
>I don't think we have the same definition of "cracked". Whether he blows
his top >in the pits before or after a race, or if he cries himself to
sleep the night before a >race in his wifes bosom, means absolutely nothing
to me. On the track is all that >matters in racing in my eyes. (I could
care less about Oakley sunglasses and >Mercedes Benz.)...etc
Mark, please stop posting html. It is not appropriate here and causes all
sorts of problems for people who don't use newsreaders which can handle it.
Not too much to ask, is it?
David Betts
"I don't think God is in heaven this weekend. I think he's at Goodwood. And
if he isn't, he's crackers" - Canon Lionel Webber
Russ
>>260km/h in blinding mist. That's choking? Do you think he would've
>hit him
>>if he could see? Try it some time. On second thought, don't.
>
>Why the hell did he need to drive at 260km/h in a blinding mist for at
>all? I think the mist is still blinding a lot of Schumacher's fans.
>The guy didn't have to push that much anymore but, hey, he had to lap
>everybody just make absolutely sure he would humiliate everyone and go
>down in the record books as the one and only champion on a wet
>track... why? why? why? He totally lost perspective of what he had to
>do: just slowly get close to Coulthard, keep following him, let the
>marshalls wave the blue flag and the black flag if it became
>necessary, safely pass where he could actually see him, win the race,
>collect 10 pts. and win the WC. OK, maybe we should'nt call this
>"cracking", let's just say he was "behaving erratically"...
>
Schumacher drives fast in the rain always....regardless of his
position. He does this to keep heat in the tires. More heat more
grip. Senna drove the same way, for the same reason in the rain.
Unfornately, it also puts you closer to the edge. (ie Monaco) Just
remember, you might sight 2 incidences (Monaco and even Spa), yet
think of the total number of great rain drives Schumacher has had.
Overall, it a very sucessfull ratio of wins to mistakes in the wet.
Russ
Rochester
Russ wrote:
Absolutely true Russ. Micheal's speed in the rain is a pleasure to watch.
It was Coulthard's fault anyway.
Badfysh
>suppose won
>>the title?
>
>Villeneuve, because Villeneuve would've been driving a Ferrari.
>
>Alain D.
>
>
>
wrong, shumacher would have punted off villeneuve on the final race for the
championship.
Alain D.
>Absolutely true Russ. Micheal's speed in the rain is a pleasure to
watch.
>It was Coulthard's fault anyway.
Oh sure. Where was Coulthard supposed to go? Michael was all over the
track, first left, than right, then slightly off to the left again and
bang! Right front wheel's ripped off. Had Coulthard opted for the
other side he would've been even slower because being outdside the
dryer trajectory and Schumacher would've rear-ended him just the same
a second earlier on the other side of the track and torn away his left
front wheel or worse, hit him right in the gearbox... The only way
this could've been avoided is if Jean Todt, instead of walking over to
McLaren, radioed Schumacher and told him: "Slow down, you're coming up
to Coulthard and he's not there to make it easy for you..." Unless, of
course, Coulthard would've matched Michael's speed. But then, if he
could have matched his speed, he wouldn't have been about to be
lapped.
Alain D.
"The blindest one is the one who doesn't want to see"
- Old French saying
Alain D.
Just to end-up in the gravel trap like last time. Unless he stalled
the car like this year. He's jinxed with those last races, I'm telling
you...
;o)
Alain D.
Rochester
"Alain D." wrote:
Well, I'm hardly as passionate about the thing as you are, though you're
not that passionate actually. But I see it as this. Micheal tucked in
behind David, fully expecting a certain speed and path through that bit of
the track, David went slower (and was erratic throughout the previous
lap), and Micheal couldn't avoid hitting him. I'm not assigning intention
by any means, but this is my humble opinion. Its also my humble opinion
that Coulthard will never be half the driver that Micheal is.
Badfysh
hmmm....(realizes shumacher's is never going to win, even in an alternate
universe)
mark jeangerard
feel if you had run his career. After all the work he's put in, he's got to
feel gypped by his peers.
--
mark
Dab wrote in message
mark jeangerard wrote in message <791494$pu8$1...@hume.nmia.com>...
>I kind of feel sorry for MS. Imagine waking up one morning in May of
1994
???????????????
Alain D.
Nah, cheer-up, he's going to win it this year... I think... if he
learned anything...
Alain D.
Alain D.
Well, we saw it differently. Anyway I'll settle with "Coulthard will
never be half the driver Michael could have been", pending on this
season's results, of course...
You never know. Maybe Coulthard will get the title this year. Maybe
even Michael.
Alain D.
Tom Cosgrave
mark jeangerard wrote in message <796fk3$620$1...@hume.nmia.com>...
>Really put yourself in Schumachers shoes. Genuinely imagine how you would
>feel if you had run his career. After all the work he's put in, he's got to
>feel gypped by his peers.
Ruin his career?!
Adelaide, Australia 1994. Who ruined who's career then?!
Gimme a break Mark.
Tom
--
Tom Cosgrave The Corrs Links Page + FAQ
Mark J. Frusciante
>Mark J. Frusciante wrote in message <36b51aeb...@news.pipeline.com>...
>>SANT...@webtv.net (Patrick Santti) wrote:
>>>There is nothing wrong with my thought process on this matter.
>>[...]
>>
>>Jacques Villeneuve says [we will win the championship this year] and
>>that's "cautious optimism"; Schumacher says [I'd rather work to win than
>>do it on cruise control], and that's "unbearable arrogance".
>>
>Actually, at the launch, JV said, "If you aim for a top ten finish, you'll
>finish tenth."
>I happen to agree....
"Wherever you go, there you are." - Buckeroo Bonzai
Mark
http://www.pipeline.com/~opus
Remove Before Flight.
Sven Baumer
> "Wherever you go, there you are." - Buckeroo Bonzai
Buckaroo Banzai:
"Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because,
remember, no matter where you go, there you are."
(in "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai accross the 8th Dimension")
Brilliant movie. Somehow...
Sven.
--
So I ask you: What the hell am I doing drinking in L.A. at 26?
L.A., L.A., L.A.