|
Post by schumi on Dec 11, 2009 20:51:07 GMT
You're putting Nicki at 80? Get ready for the wrath of Schumi. Don't worry, I'm still trying to get my head around DK's inclusion of Moss in his top 5.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Dec 11, 2009 21:00:24 GMT
Don't worry, I'm still trying to get my head around DK's inclusion of Moss in his top 5. Well, I have him at No. 7 Schumi. His loyalty to British manufacturers (plus bloody awful reliability in the Vanwall in 1958, a year won 4 races, 3 more than champion Hawthorn) may have cost him a championship, but there's little doubt that he was the best driver in the world from 1958 to 1961. Who was the better Villeneuve - Gilles or Jacques? And yet it was Jacques who ended up as World Champion, after one of Schumacher's "Dick Dastardly" moments in 1997. And remember that I consider Jimmy White to be one of the best 5 snooker players of all-time, becuase anyone who could get close to the Scottish Robot in 1992 and 1994 (at a time that the Scottish Robot was completely well... Robotic) has to pretty good themselves.
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Dec 11, 2009 21:04:35 GMT
That's another reason the drivers wouldn't have voted for Schumacher - too many of them had a run in with him at one time or another. Moss at 7 is more realistic, but he has him above Schumacher, and that's not.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Dec 11, 2009 21:12:28 GMT
I don't think anyone could argue that Senna isn't the greatest with any real credibility, unless they were around when Fangio was.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Dec 11, 2009 21:15:46 GMT
That's another reason the drivers wouldn't have voted for Schumacher - too many of them had a run in with him at one time or another. Moss at 7 is more realistic, but he has him above Schumacher, and that's not. Schumi, you're forgetting that Senna wasn't exactly Mr. Popular - his move at Sukuza in '90 received just about universal comdemnation (he should have just been a sneaky bastard like Prost the year before ). And some of the drivers are 98 years old, what has Schumacher done to upset them??? Face it, Schumacher was good, but Senna was better.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Dec 11, 2009 21:18:24 GMT
I don't think anyone could argue that Senna isn't the greatest with any real credibility, unless they were around when Fangio was. Well, you must have been around 760 at that point, so who do you think is better - Senna or Fangio. I do see where you're coming from. Therefore the only thing I can say with authority is Senna is the best driver I've seen since watching F1 from 1982. When does your era of watching F1 start Schumi?
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Dec 11, 2009 21:19:47 GMT
I don't think anyone could argue that Senna isn't the greatest with any real credibility, unless they were around when Fangio was. Days on end without posting and you pipe up with that. Yes, we're all so bored we're just winding each other up for fun. But here's a serious one for you - aside from the woman in Sainsbury's, there's another deluded soul who works in Asda. Although he, at least, admitted to liking my coat.
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Dec 11, 2009 21:21:04 GMT
Face it, Schumacher was good, but Senna was better. Schumacher was good for 15 years - would Senna have been?
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Dec 11, 2009 21:25:04 GMT
When does your era of watching F1 start Schumi? Mid '90s, I think, although I've seen a lot of footage from before that.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Dec 11, 2009 21:27:41 GMT
Face it, Schumacher was good, but Senna was better. Schumacher was good for 15 years - would Senna have been? He already been been for 10 years, and showed no signs of slowing up. Remember he was only man on pole postion in '94 before his accident, with Schumacher taking a couple of lucky wins due to non-finishes for Senna. In fact, Schumacher never had a single pole whilst Senna was still alive. Schumacher's first championship would not come until 2000 had Senna survived - the Williams would have taken Senna to the 1994 to 1997 World Championships (he'd have points to make up in '94, but by the end of year, Hill in the Williams was faster Schumacher in the Benetton - and Senna would have been gaining 6 points a race).
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Dec 11, 2009 21:31:32 GMT
When does your era of watching F1 start Schumi? Mid '90s, I think, although I've seen a lot of footage from before that. I never realised it was that late. That would explain why you rate Schumacher to be the best - you missed out on the glory period of F1. 1985 to 1991 were THE years when F1 was just brilliant. Senna v Prost v Mansell v Piquet. Get in! ;D
|
|
|
Post by admin on Dec 11, 2009 21:37:42 GMT
Days on end without posting and you pipe up with that. Je voudrais mourir dans tes bras, any better for you?
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Dec 11, 2009 21:44:27 GMT
Schumacher was good for 15 years - would Senna have been? He already been been for 10 years, and showed no signs of slowing up. Remember he was only man on pole postion in '94 before his accident, with Schumacher taking a couple of lucky wins due to non-finishes for Senna. In fact, Schumacher never had a single pole whilst Senna was still alive. Schumacher's first championship would not come until 2000 had Senna survived - the Williams would have taken Senna to the 1994 to 1997 World Championships (he'd have points to make up in '94, but by the end of year, Hill in the Williams was faster Schumacher in the Benetton - and Senna would have been gaining 6 points a race). Schumacher's first full season and he finished 3rd in the championship, Senna 4th in his. They both came 4th in their 2nd season. Schumacher won his first championship by his 3rd, but Senna not until his 4th. And as for your predictions of what would have happened - can I have the winning lotto numbers please?
|
|
|
Post by admin on Dec 11, 2009 21:53:44 GMT
Senna was a genius. Schumacher, I'm afraid, dearest, was just a journeyman automaton.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Dec 11, 2009 22:01:07 GMT
He already been been for 10 years, and showed no signs of slowing up. Remember he was only man on pole postion in '94 before his accident, with Schumacher taking a couple of lucky wins due to non-finishes for Senna. In fact, Schumacher never had a single pole whilst Senna was still alive. Schumacher's first championship would not come until 2000 had Senna survived - the Williams would have taken Senna to the 1994 to 1997 World Championships (he'd have points to make up in '94, but by the end of year, Hill in the Williams was faster Schumacher in the Benetton - and Senna would have been gaining 6 points a race). Schumacher's first full season and he finished 3rd in the championship, Senna 4th in his. They both came 4th in their 2nd season. Schumacher won his first championship by his 3rd, but Senna not until his 4th. And as for your predictions of what would have happened - can I have the winning lotto numbers please? Schumi, difference was Senna had to wait until his 5th season to get a truly compeitive car - at which point he went into Prost's team and beat Prost That he managed to win 6 races for Lotus and finish 3rd in the championship in the Lotus at a time when Lotus were falling to pieces is further testimony to his genius. However, I can now see your problem - you're just going by the stats instead of having actually seen Senna battling for the championship whilst still in the Lotus (he led the championship in mid-1987) when the Lotus was crap and the Williams was all-conquering and had two rather good drivers in Piquet and Mansell. In 1986 and 1987, you had Mansell & Piquet in a bloody good Williams car, Prost in a bloody good McLaren car and Senna in the old tosh Lotus. And he gave three drivers in damn sight better cars a run for their money. And remember Senna also won two of his championships, after the tide had turned against McLaren. Prost's Ferrari in 1990 and Mansell's Williams were both faster, yet Senna won both championships. And then came maybe Senna's best year of all in '93. McLaren were in turmoil, having lost the Honda engine, and were hiring in an engine race-by-race. Senna still won five races that year and finished second in the championship in a make-do car. Amazing, simply amazing. At Donnigton, he lapped Prost, despite the fact Prost was in a much better car. The bloke was a one-off, as anyone who watched F1 through the late eighties and early nineties will testify. No I can't compare Senna to Fangio, but I can compare him to Schumacher, and it's a no contest. You can consider Schumacher as the best driver since the mid-ninties, just as I can consider Senna as the best driver since 1982.
|
|