- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
jepp it must be the lation blood...and some very dark shades back in 1992;-) cause I see everything very different to you..and all concluding in: It was mind blowing for a ROOKIE to BEAT SENNA IN A WET RACE at one of the three real drivers tracks on the calendar!Ciro Pabón wrote:Look, I have a simple policy: I don't bash drivers. But this time I have to say something, as politely as I can.Torso wrote:sorry I ment to say MSchumacher beat Senna (in what counts as his rookie season 1992)... And particularly MSchumachers drive at Spa that year was simply mind blowing!
Could you explain what was "mind blowing" about Schumacher 1992 Spa race?
This is what I saw, when I was young and beautiful...
Mansell got the pole, Senna took the lead away from him at the start. Schumacher, on a meritorious third place on the qualy, had a big off at Stavelot in lap 30 and decided to go for wet tyres. I saw it with my own eyes and is a little disturbing to see every young man nowadays claiming that was "tactical brilliance" when, from my particular point of view, he was the least capable of the front field in rainy conditions. That was my first thought: "well, the rookie made a mistake".
He was mighty scared, if you ask for my impression, and after the race he declared, in his usual style, he had done it because when Martin Brundle (Martin Brundle, for heaven's sake!) had overtaken him, he had noticed Mr. Brundle's tyres were worn out, so he decided to change his own tyres... that was the first time I saw a driver lying unashamedly in front of a journalist: there was a huge silence when he said that.
Everybody was like: "So, he was not able to see his own tyres? WTF? Why was he in need of watching other people's tyres to realize his own were worn out?" I did not like the guy from that particular race on very much: he had not the slightest need to say such an incongrous phrase. I remember Senna was moving his head side to side in disbelief: he was not particularly fond of exaggerations, let me tell you.
Williams did not react until later to change tyres, because no one of their drivers was that unexperienced under wet conditions.
Even with that bad stroke of luck, I can assure you Mr. Mansell was closing quickly on Schumacher when his exhaust broke and started to fall in position. I don't have the numbers at hand (I tried to find lap times but I couldn't) but I have more or less good memory.
Senna had gambled before that rain will stop and remained ahead. Rain did no cease, so he had to stop for wets after a brave effort that made him lost a lot of time. His late charge was not enough, he only managed to pass Hakkinen.
Schumacher was fortunate to have his big off right when the track was starting to get wet: he changed tyres before everybody and it paid off. That was a race for Mansell, had his car not broke.
I'm not sure if everybody is repeating legends about Schumi based on comments by people that did not even see the race, BTW. He is a great driver, but he definitely was not the "mother of Superman" at that moment in time, in my humble opinion (no offense intended, pleeze). He had better races, if you ask me.
That year, for a regular fan like me, he was an extremely good rookie that had been beaten solidly by Nick Heidfeld (whose caliber everybody is discovering now!) when karting together and that had got a wonderful car thanks to a management that, previously, only rock stars had. That management went on to squeeze every drop they could from that victory, a first for him. Good for him, but to see people claiming THAT stroke of luck was an extraordinary performance, when in my opinion have no idea what they're speaking about, makes me boil, specially when "Rain master" stories started to sprout a few years later.
Sorry, it must be the latin blood. Again, no offense intended, please ellaborate as much as you want. I'm all ears.
Oh, and do you really think David Coulthard was the driver of the race at Bahrain? Sure, he had a great race.
Did you see Lewis Hamilton or did not? He made a historical performance, becoming the first rookie ever to get three second places in a row in his three first races, something never done before: this converts him in the best rookie ever (not counting Mr. Baghetti OTHER stroke of luck). Bahrain was a special race because of that. Claiming that Mr. Coulthard, a great driver I admire, overshadowed that is a little strange. Could you ellaborate on that too, please?
Actually 5, he's been keeping his head down but he's there none the less, Nick in his always improving BMW is just one point behind Massa, I'm not ruling him out by any means, if he can keep consistant and occasionally pick off one of the big names, like today, he'll have the advantage of being the only driver who has a team mate completely willing to help, after all Massa isn't going to pull over for Kimi if they're both in for the title, and I don't think Ron would ever ask Lewis to move over for Fernando if his new star still had a shot at the title.Hamilton beat Alonso fair and square and that`s good. I hope he can keep up his momentum cause obviously at the moment that means we have 4 drivers right in there for the title.
"Rainmaster" was a nick given to Senna. When he died biased German media started calling Schuey "regenmeister" just as they've called him "king of Ardenes". Damon Hill who started racing more-less at the same time as Schuey had only one win less in Spa than Schuey (3 wins Damon 4 wins Schuey) So why was Schuey "king of Ardenes" and Hill wasn't?Torso wrote:And from what MSchumacher wen`t on to produce in wet races over the years truly earned him the nick "regenmeister".
I am not German but I respect MSchumacher for his performance in wet conditions over the years. To me the all time Rainmaster is Schuey not Senna.manchild wrote:"Rainmaster" was a nick given to Senna. When he died biased German media started calling Schuey "regenmeister" just as they've called him "king of Ardenes". Damon Hill who started racing more-less at the same time as Schuey had only one win less in Spa than Schuey (3 wins Damon 4 wins Schuey) So why was Schuey "king of Ardenes" and Hill wasn't?Torso wrote:And from what MSchumacher wen`t on to produce in wet races over the years truly earned him the nick "regenmeister".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d89PcySN ... ed&search=Ciro Pabón wrote:Look, I have a simple policy: I don't bash drivers. But this time I have to say something, as politely as I can.Torso wrote:sorry I ment to say MSchumacher beat Senna (in what counts as his rookie season 1992)... And particularly MSchumachers drive at Spa that year was simply mind blowing!
Could you explain what was "mind blowing" about Schumacher 1992 Spa race?
This is what I saw, when I was young and beautiful...
Mansell got the pole, Senna took the lead away from him at the start. Schumacher, on a meritorious third place on the qualy, had a big off at Stavelot in lap 30 and decided to go for wet tyres. I saw it with my own eyes and is a little disturbing to see every young man nowadays claiming that was "tactical brilliance" when, from my particular point of view, he was the least capable of the front field in rainy conditions. That was my first thought: "well, the rookie made a mistake".
He was mighty scared, if you ask for my impression, and after the race he declared, in his usual style, he had done it because when Martin Brundle (Martin Brundle, for heaven's sake!) had overtaken him, he had noticed Mr. Brundle's tyres were worn out, so he decided to change his own tyres... that was the first time I saw a driver lying unashamedly in front of a journalist: there was a huge silence when he said that.
Everybody was like: "So, he was not able to see his own tyres? WTF? Why was he in need of watching other people's tyres to realize his own were worn out?" I did not like the guy from that particular race on very much: he had not the slightest need to say such an incongrous phrase. I remember Senna was moving his head side to side in disbelief: he was not particularly fond of exaggerations, let me tell you.
Williams did not react until later to change tyres, because no one of their drivers was that unexperienced under wet conditions.
Even with that bad stroke of luck, I can assure you Mr. Mansell was closing quickly on Schumacher when his exhaust broke and started to fall in position. I don't have the numbers at hand (I tried to find lap times but I couldn't) but I have more or less good memory.
Senna had gambled before that rain will stop and remained ahead. Rain did no cease, so he had to stop for wets after a brave effort that made him lost a lot of time. His late charge was not enough, he only managed to pass Hakkinen.
Schumacher was fortunate to have his big off right when the track was starting to get wet: he changed tyres before everybody and it paid off. That was a race for Mansell, had his car not broke.
I'm not sure if everybody is repeating legends about Schumi based on comments by people that did not even see the race, BTW. He is a great driver, but he definitely was not the "mother of Superman" at that moment in time, in my humble opinion (no offense intended, pleeze
That year, for a regular fan like me, he was an extremely good rookie that had been beaten solidly by Nick Heidfeld (whose caliber everybody is discovering now!) when karting together and that had got a wonderful car thanks to a management that, previously, only rock stars had. That management went on to squeeze every drop they could from that victory, a first for him. Good for him, but to see people claiming THAT stroke of luck was an extraordinary performance, when in my opinion have no idea what they're speaking about, makes me boil, specially when "Rain master" stories started to sprout a few years later.
Sorry, it must be the latin blood. Again, no offense intended, please ellaborate as much as you want. I'm all ears.
Oh, and do you really think David Coulthard was the driver of the race at Bahrain? Sure, he had a great race.
Did you see Lewis Hamilton or did not? He made a historical performance, becoming the first rookie ever to get three second places in a row in his three first races, something never done before: this converts him in the best rookie ever (not counting Mr. Baghetti OTHER stroke of luck). Bahrain was a special race because of that. Claiming that Mr. Coulthard, a great driver I admire, overshadowed that is a little strange. Could you ellaborate on that too, please?
I'm sorry for the post-race conference that is now effectively damaged. Shut! I wanted to capture Senna's face at the end of the conference but I could not.
Does that mean the From 2000-2004 Schmies WC are the same as he had the best car?AeroGT3 wrote:I think Hamilton is way over hyped. He's driving the quickest car. Of course he's going to be on podium! I'm more impressed with Davidson. Look where he's getting in a year old Honda with a team that hasn't any money.
Well, when Shumi won the DC's from 2000-2004, he wasnt a rookie anymore, so lets leave him out of this. And concentrate on the actual rookies and their respective times in history, Hamilton at the moment, more specifically.Sawtooth-spike wrote:Does that mean the From 2000-2004 Schmies WC are the same as he had the best car?.AeroGT3 wrote:I think Hamilton is way over hyped. He's driving the quickest car. Of course he's going to be on podium! I'm more impressed with Davidson. Look where he's getting in a year old Honda with a team that hasn't any money.
