Schumacher worked harder, Hamilton has more talent - Massa

The contract talk always makes me laugh. Irvine, Barrichello, Massa...none of them claim that they had to play 2nd fiddle. Irvine went a step further and say he was nowhere near talented enough to beat Schumacher. He's always been very honest about it. No shame in being slower than the absolute best.

 

I'm sure that this will be the thread that ends the debate on Schumacher vs Hamilton.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Even athleticism performance has benefited from technological inputs: Bob Hayes won the Tokyo 1964 100m final in 10s flat on an ash track (he even ran 9.9s on a wet track in semi-final but the tailwind was too high at 5.28m/s for this to count as a record), at the following olympics in Mexico the track was made of polyurethane, Jim Hayes won the 100m final in 9.9s. It has to be mentioned that Mexico 1968 was a rather rich olympic venue for track & field records (26 world records or olympic records over 36 events).

There are other athleticism events where technology has been playing an even more significant role in enhancing performance: example pole vault, javelin throw

 

First, Felipe never said that, what he said wast hat Michael worked a lot harder, he relied on his talent as much as on his work, and elton is more instinctive, doesn't work that hard (Merc does it for him), with the advantage he has, his talent is enough. At no point does Massa say "Hamilton is more talented than Michael". So this article is just a pure fabrication.

 

As you list it's a tiny amount ober the decades, and each F1 car is nothing more than a prototype.

PS. My F355 was 1994. First street car with underpants aero.

 

Different eras with different levels of car dominance.

Next thread title: Who's better, Hamilton or Jim Clark ?

 

Please, let's not insult Jim's memory!

 

F1 has ALWAYS been an "Engineering Contest"

 

You realize that NO ONE can drive at "105%". 100% is ALL anyone can do.

 

Of course I do; but the expression has been used.

Rgds

 

Thanks for posting that article, I agree, it's well written. It also has perspective which at least a few people in here could use. It's a silly debate and one that has beaten a dead horse beyond recognition. Mr Noble states, "Celebrate that you live in such an age when legends of the sport place their lives on the line for us, and produce such racing, such humanity, and such legend."

 

We will just never know. Schumacher put the laps in to be the best driver of the team he was in, I would assume Hamilton would do the same under the same rules. But since they aren't racing under the same rules, we cannot possibly compare and neither can any teammate who didn't race with both of them. They are the greatest of their respective era.

As for schumacher and senna being the best in slower cars... Hill, Hungary, 1997. They basically lucked out in having a car and setup that matched well enough with the track that they were not inferior for that particular race. Schumacher never took a championship in an inferior car and in his Ferrari years never had a teammate that was good enough to beat him, or even allowed to challenge him for the championship. Senna very much the same, only ever won championships in the best cars and had preferential treatment from Honda. Are we going to celebrate Hill as one of the greatest due to his 1997 Hungary race because he came so close to a ridiculously superior win in a normally ridiculously inferior car? No, didn't think so.

Hamilton is lucky to find himself in the best car of the grid but he got to that position by skill. He worked hard to get there, it wasn't simply gifted. And the team weren't simply gifted their championships, they just did a better job than the other teams more consistently. How often have we seen Ferrari and Redbull put up a strong challenge at the start of the season only to fail as the season progressed?

 

And Mercedes had been developing their hybrid for 7 years with Brawn, Costa and Schumacher.
Virtual PU development freeze by FIA
= game over.

Hamilton has also enjoyed 100% reliability for three years. Staggering achievement from Brackley.

 

Now they've gone a step further and banned actual development of the rest of the car (minus a credit here and there)....just as Mercedes released their most dominant car yet.

 

Schumacher is world champion in 94 in an inferior car. We been through this already
Oh and 97 Hungary hill was all due to his tyres not the set up. They resisted the heat very well. After that he was back where he belonged a decent but mediocre WC at the same time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Regarding the reliability...I just looked it up. 4 races ended for Lewis with reliability since he started racing for Mercedes....4! That's remarkable. To put that into context, Schumacher had 5 reliability DNF's in the first season at Ferrari....

 

Are you guys finished whining? You are not gonna change Massa's or any of Schumacher's TEAM MATE's view. They were Schumacher's TEAM MATE. They know his stats better than any of us. Massa is not an internet driver as some of us are. Massa insight is Hamilton has more talent. He is the 5th team mate of Schumacher to say this. So at this point, disagreeing with Schumacher's TEAM MATES are for entertainment purposes only.

 

Todt has killed the sport.

Bernie Ecclestone was criticizing the predictability of Mercedes back in 2016 !

 

That is not remarkable, it is incredible.

But to be fair, it was Michael that was pushing Ferrari in reliability for years.

With the multi-race weekend engine formula, reliability is the ONLY game in town.