Michael Schumacher - Your Views.

Senna for me was a much better driver. He had something special and dominated at a time of much better competition. His qualifying speed was insane.
People dont like Schumacher because his will to win surpassed any sense of morality. Some of his manouvers have been a disgrace and I dont share that opinion about him being less dangerous than Senna. As for his success, well why not take a look at the relative stats for Alonso, Hamilton and Vettel since the latter joined F1. Do you suggest Vettel is by far the superior driver of the three? Those stats would suggest so.
I think (unfairly) he is also stained by the behaviour of Ferrari in those years. The outlaw of Beryllium that McLaren had invested so heavily in, the Michelin tyres, Indianapolis etc were not in the interest of the sport and although I think Micheal was heavily involved in Ferrari's demands the blame lies at the door of the FIA.
As for comparing Schumacher with people like Fangio, its impossible. One, I dont remember any F1 before 88-ish. Two, the sport is so different now it is like comparing Schumacher and Loeb.

I never actually liked Schumacher but I still regard him as being a great driver.

His personal traits included ruthlessness, a determination to win (useful in any racing driver) and arrogance. But he also, in my opinion, simply had no respect for his fellow drivers. This lack of respect led him to make the dodgy moves he is remembered for.

Obviously the most successful, but for me not the greatest.

I think his performances in the 96' Ferrari are vastly over-rated for a start + that is where I think a lot of his greatness appears to be measured - winning in a car that was not the best on the grid. It appears to be forgotten that Alesi could/would have won 4 races for Ferrari the previous season had it not been for retirements

One of the greatest drivers

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

I'm not saying that this validates my previous point - but you used to hear so much that the 96' Ferrari was having it's wheels driven off my Schummy and that only he could get those results.

But go back to 95' put in the lost results that probably cost Alesi 3 wins (Monza, Spa, Suzuka) and a 2nd (Monaco - when Brundle took him out) and the title race looked somewhat different.

Schumacher 94
Alesi 78
Hill 65

I say it once, I say it again - Schumacher took more praise for 96' than was possibly deserved - if you look at how Alesi drove the Ferrari the previous year.

and yes I was bored by today's points scoring + in my magical world fixing the results that Alesi lost --- and...

Schumacher 254
Alesi 230

Now either Schumacher is getting too much praise, or Alesi isn't

Jean Alesi

Won one race in his life and you compare him with Schumacher?

Retired more races than he finished and you compare him with Schumacher?

I'm comparing 2 seasons - not a career

Retired more races than he finished
-----------------------------------------------
Taking that as a separate point - that has an awful lot to do with the reliability of the Ferrari between 91-95, and if you don't know that then there is a massive gap in your knowledge

The Ferrari team was in chaos before Schumacher joined them. John Barnard refused to leave Britain and would fax his ideas to the team.

The team were famous for their internal bickering and extremley long liquid lunches.

Schumacher changed all that.

Does that not make Alesi's performances in the 95' Ferrari all that more impressive?

But don't get me wrong WTCBU I'm not seriously comparing the two of them - there is no comparison. I just wonder how special Schumacher's performances were in 96 - as opposed to the drives by Alesi in the previous year at the same team.