planetf1.com

Mod Note - split from thread: http://forum.planet-f1.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14486

Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

Indeed in 2006 Schumacher had close to the equal best car, in 2007 and 2008 he would have had the best car.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

Indeed in 2006 Schumacher had close to the equal best car, in 2007 and 2008 he would have had the best car.

And he would have had number 1 status. Something neither Ferrari driver had in 07.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

Indeed in 2006 Schumacher had close to the equal best car, in 2007 and 2008 he would have had the best car.

And he would have had number 1 status. Something neither Ferrari driver had in 07.

I was going to say not against Kimi but then given the start Kimi made, 3 tenths slower than Massa, and how Ferrari tend to operate plus race fueled qualifying, Ferrari could easily and probably would have facilitated this even without the consent of Kimi.

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

Maybe he would have but he would still have had to compete with Hamilton and Alonso for the title and there's no way to say for certain that he would have won. I don't think the Renault was any better than the Ferrari in 2006 and Alonso still managed to beat him. And Michael was getting older and older at that stage.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

Indeed in 2006 Schumacher had close to the equal best car, in 2007 and 2008 he would have had the best car.

And he would have had number 1 status. Something neither Ferrari driver had in 07.

Didn't Massa gift the last race to Kimi?

Yes but that's a bit different to having number 1 status the whole season.

I.E all the testing, first call on strategy etc.

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

I'm wondering did you watch F1 in 2006?

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

Maybe he would have but he would still have had to compete with Hamilton and Alonso for the title and there's no way to say for certain that he would have won. I don't think the Renault was any better than the Ferrari in 2006 and Alonso still managed to beat him. And Michael was getting older and older at that stage.

Schumacher was 4 to 5 tenths quicker than Massa in 2006, Massa was the equal of Kimi, do the maths.

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

Maybe he would have but he would still have had to compete with Hamilton and Alonso for the title and there's no way to say for certain that he would have won. I don't think the Renault was any better than the Ferrari in 2006 and Alonso still managed to beat him. And Michael was getting older and older at that stage.

Schumacher was 4 to 5 tenths quicker than Massa in 2006, Massa was the equal of Kimi, do the maths.

I think the gap was more like 0.35 on average and, again, with race fuel loads in the car (Michael had strategy preference everywhere) and with Felipe in his first year with the big team. I think the gap in single lap pace between them was not as great as it appeared. In terms of race pace, Michael was on a different planet but I don't think that Alonso and Hamilton wouldn't have had a shot in the McLaren. Hamilton would certainly have had his hands full in 2008 though as I think the Ferrari that year was quicker by a slightly bigger margin than in 2007.

None the less, I don't personally peg Michael as superior to either Hamilton or Alonso and I wouldn't call it a foregone conclusion against either of them. You can't look at Massa the same during the times when he is being held down in that #2 role by Ferrari. His form is clearly not the same in those circumstances as when he is given a fair shake.

sandman1347 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

Maybe he would have but he would still have had to compete with Hamilton and Alonso for the title and there's no way to say for certain that he would have won. I don't think the Renault was any better than the Ferrari in 2006 and Alonso still managed to beat him. And Michael was getting older and older at that stage.

Schumacher was 4 to 5 tenths quicker than Massa in 2006, Massa was the equal of Kimi, do the maths.

I think the gap was more like 0.35 on average and, again, with race fuel loads in the car (Michael had strategy preference everywhere) and with Felipe in his first year with the big team. I think the gap in single lap pace between them was not as great as it appeared. In terms of race pace, Michael was on a different planet but I don't think that Alonso and Hamilton wouldn't have had a shot in the McLaren. Hamilton would certainly have had his hands full in 2008 though as I think the Ferrari that year was quicker by a slightly bigger margin than in 2007.

None the less, I don't personally peg Michael as superior to either Hamilton or Alonso and I wouldn't call it a foregone conclusion against either of them. You can't look at Massa the same during the times when he is being held down in that #2 role by Ferrari. His form is clearly not the same in those circumstances as when he is given a fair shake.

I think that Schumacher beats Kimi quite easily and Kimi won the title after all, Massa had a 11-2 losing record against teammates yet you think he closes what you call a 0.35s gap quite considerable in 2007 in respect to Schumacher?

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

Maybe he would have but he would still have had to compete with Hamilton and Alonso for the title and there's no way to say for certain that he would have won. I don't think the Renault was any better than the Ferrari in 2006 and Alonso still managed to beat him. And Michael was getting older and older at that stage.

Schumacher was 4 to 5 tenths quicker than Massa in 2006, Massa was the equal of Kimi, do the maths.

I think the gap was more like 0.35 on average and, again, with race fuel loads in the car (Michael had strategy preference everywhere) and with Felipe in his first year with the big team. I think the gap in single lap pace between them was not as great as it appeared. In terms of race pace, Michael was on a different planet but I don't think that Alonso and Hamilton wouldn't have had a shot in the McLaren. Hamilton would certainly have had his hands full in 2008 though as I think the Ferrari that year was quicker by a slightly bigger margin than in 2007.

None the less, I don't personally peg Michael as superior to either Hamilton or Alonso and I wouldn't call it a foregone conclusion against either of them. You can't look at Massa the same during the times when he is being held down in that #2 role by Ferrari. His form is clearly not the same in those circumstances as when he is given a fair shake.

I think that Schumacher beats Kimi quite easily and Kimi won the title after all, Massa had a 11-2 losing record against teammates yet you think he closes what you call a 0.35s gap quite considerable in 2007 in respect to Schumacher?

This isn't a math equation. Things happen during a season. DNFs, mistakes, etc. Had Michael stayed on at Ferrari, nothing would have happened in exactly the same way. There is absolutely no guarantee that he would have won.

sandman1347 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: I seem to remember Massa winning a couple of races in 2006 and setting some pole positions; several podium finishes, etc. If he were teamed with Raikkonen instead of Schumacher that year, he would have put up even more impressive numbers. I just think it's overly presumptuous to say Michael wins the championship in 2007 or 2008.

He did. Both wins when Schumacher was compromised of course. In that same season Schumacher 7 wins and more than double the podiums. Why would he not have done something similar in 2007?

Maybe he would have but he would still have had to compete with Hamilton and Alonso for the title and there's no way to say for certain that he would have won. I don't think the Renault was any better than the Ferrari in 2006 and Alonso still managed to beat him. And Michael was getting older and older at that stage.

Schumacher was 4 to 5 tenths quicker than Massa in 2006, Massa was the equal of Kimi, do the maths.

I think the gap was more like 0.35 on average and, again, with race fuel loads in the car (Michael had strategy preference everywhere) and with Felipe in his first year with the big team. I think the gap in single lap pace between them was not as great as it appeared. In terms of race pace, Michael was on a different planet but I don't think that Alonso and Hamilton wouldn't have had a shot in the McLaren. Hamilton would certainly have had his hands full in 2008 though as I think the Ferrari that year was quicker by a slightly bigger margin than in 2007.

None the less, I don't personally peg Michael as superior to either Hamilton or Alonso and I wouldn't call it a foregone conclusion against either of them. You can't look at Massa the same during the times when he is being held down in that #2 role by Ferrari. His form is clearly not the same in those circumstances as when he is given a fair shake.

Massa was pulling Grand Chelems in the 2007 Ferrari and the only reason he wasn't in the title race come the last race was because he had the worst luck of all the title contenders. He was also poor in the wet races that fell at the end of the year (Japan and China) and lost lots of points there. Still even given that, he only lost the WDC by 16 points which would have been only 13 points if he didn't let Kimi through in the final race.

Massa's head to head with Alonso that year was also pretty equal on all measures. Everything points to the Ferrari being the best car. The best car + the best driver of all time still close to his prime...Schumacher would have won 10-12 races in the F2007. It would have been 2002/2004 esque.

lamo wrote:
Massa was pulling Grand Chelems in the 2007 Ferrari and the only reason he wasn't in the title race come the last race was because he had the worst luck of all the title contenders. He was also poor in the wet races that fell at the end of the year (Japan and China) and lost lots of points there. Still even given that, he only lost the WDC by 16 points which would have been only 13 points if he didn't let Kimi through in the final race.

Massa's head to head with Alonso that year was also pretty equal on all measures. Everything points to the Ferrari being the best car. The best car + the best driver of all time still close to his prime...Schumacher would have won 10-12 races in the F2007. It would have been 2002/2004 esque.

In everything that has gone since, I can't for the life of me believe that Schumacher (or Alonso, or Hamilton..) would have failed to win 2007 & 2008 in the Ferrari.

If Massa and/or Kimi can win or come close, then those in the top tier will win it. The 'myth' of Massa & Kimi's pace for a period, comes from the fact they had a really, really quick car and each other as a teammate with little reference point as to how really not the best each of them were.

The myth is entirely based on Räikkönen’s speed circa 2003-2005, the accepted wisdom was that Raikkonen and Alonso were equal and better than the rest of the field. So when in 2007 Massa was easily quicker than Raikkonen (who was being paid 5 times more than him) in the first half of the season - F1 as a collective went with Massa stepping up rather than Kimi struggling / not as good as first thought.

Even in 2007 when he won the title - Kimi did not out perform Massa for speed (unless it was wet) except for a few occasions when he was very marginally quicker and usually on his strong tracks - Spa and possibly Silverstone too although we will never know there as Massa stalled on the grid.

knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

Indeed in 2006 Schumacher had close to the equal best car, in 2007 and 2008 he would have had the best car.

2007 and 2008 were close to equal, too

Ennis wrote:

lamo wrote:
Massa was pulling Grand Chelems in the 2007 Ferrari and the only reason he wasn't in the title race come the last race was because he had the worst luck of all the title contenders. He was also poor in the wet races that fell at the end of the year (Japan and China) and lost lots of points there. Still even given that, he only lost the WDC by 16 points which would have been only 13 points if he didn't let Kimi through in the final race.

Massa's head to head with Alonso that year was also pretty equal on all measures. Everything points to the Ferrari being the best car. The best car + the best driver of all time still close to his prime...Schumacher would have won 10-12 races in the F2007. It would have been 2002/2004 esque.

In everything that has gone since, I can't for the life of me believe that Schumacher (or Alonso, or Hamilton..) would have failed to win 2007 & 2008 in the Ferrari.

If Massa and/or Kimi can win or come close, then those in the top tier will win it. The 'myth' of Massa & Kimi's pace for a period, comes from the fact they had a really, really quick car and each other as a teammate with little reference point as to how really not the best each of them were.

Indeed Massa's reputation as a top line driver started in 2007 and ended in 2009, the period he was teammates with Kimi.

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

Compare where Massa was in 06 to 07.

Indeed in 2006 Schumacher had close to the equal best car, in 2007 and 2008 he would have had the best car.

2007 and 2008 were close to equal, too

Yes Massa with a losing record of 11-2 against teammates was the equal of Alonso and Hamilton, not likely.

pokerman wrote:

Ennis wrote:

lamo wrote:
Massa was pulling Grand Chelems in the 2007 Ferrari and the only reason he wasn't in the title race come the last race was because he had the worst luck of all the title contenders. He was also poor in the wet races that fell at the end of the year (Japan and China) and lost lots of points there. Still even given that, he only lost the WDC by 16 points which would have been only 13 points if he didn't let Kimi through in the final race.

Massa's head to head with Alonso that year was also pretty equal on all measures. Everything points to the Ferrari being the best car. The best car + the best driver of all time still close to his prime...Schumacher would have won 10-12 races in the F2007. It would have been 2002/2004 esque.

In everything that has gone since, I can't for the life of me believe that Schumacher (or Alonso, or Hamilton..) would have failed to win 2007 & 2008 in the Ferrari.

If Massa and/or Kimi can win or come close, then those in the top tier will win it. The 'myth' of Massa & Kimi's pace for a period, comes from the fact they had a really, really quick car and each other as a teammate with little reference point as to how really not the best each of them were.

Indeed Massa's reputation as a top line driver started in 2007 and ended in 2009, the period he was teammates with Kimi.

A bit unfair, he had some strong qualifying/races against Schumacher I recall and he had a strong qualifying year in 2013 against Alonso only losing 11-8 as well as putting the Williams on a podium occasionally. Massa's main problems are his racecraft, split-decision judgements and wet driving skills all of which are sub-par really for a guy of his natural speed. He also has trouble staying away from white lines and skidding off tracks.

Fuel adjusted, Schumacher out qualified Massa in every Q3 they both took part in. Even Turkey when Schumacher made a huge error at turn 1 and lost half a second. Fuel adjusted, Massa was only within 0.2 of MS once or twice if my memory serves correctly. The gap was usually 0.350-0.550 range. The gap between MS and Massa (race pace and qually) was the largest gap between team mates in the entire 2006 grid, next largest was Alonso to Fisichella.

mas wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Ennis wrote:

lamo wrote:
Massa was pulling Grand Chelems in the 2007 Ferrari and the only reason he wasn't in the title race come the last race was because he had the worst luck of all the title contenders. He was also poor in the wet races that fell at the end of the year (Japan and China) and lost lots of points there. Still even given that, he only lost the WDC by 16 points which would have been only 13 points if he didn't let Kimi through in the final race.

Massa's head to head with Alonso that year was also pretty equal on all measures. Everything points to the Ferrari being the best car. The best car + the best driver of all time still close to his prime...Schumacher would have won 10-12 races in the F2007. It would have been 2002/2004 esque.

In everything that has gone since, I can't for the life of me believe that Schumacher (or Alonso, or Hamilton..) would have failed to win 2007 & 2008 in the Ferrari.

If Massa and/or Kimi can win or come close, then those in the top tier will win it. The 'myth' of Massa & Kimi's pace for a period, comes from the fact they had a really, really quick car and each other as a teammate with little reference point as to how really not the best each of them were.

Indeed Massa's reputation as a top line driver started in 2007 and ended in 2009, the period he was teammates with Kimi.

A bit unfair, he had some strong qualifying/races against Schumacher I recall and he had a strong qualifying year in 2013 against Alonso only losing 11-8 as well as putting the Williams on a podium occasionally. Massa's main problems are his racecraft, split-decision judgements and wet driving skills all of which are sub-par really for a guy of his natural speed. He also has trouble staying away from white lines and skidding off tracks.

How can it be seen as strong qualifying when he was 4-5 tenths slower, Massa's Turkey pole for instance was because Schumacher was carrying 7 laps more fuel than Massa, Massa was fueled light to try and place him between Schumacher and Alonso, but Schumacher made a mistake and only qualified 2nd about 2 tenths slower, 7 laps of fuel was about 6-7 tenths and Schumacher ran off the track at that.

Team orders were not allowed so Schumacher just sat behind Massa in the race knowing he would overcut him after the first pit stop. However a SC came out and everyone pitted, Schumacher had to queue behind Massa in the pits and this allowed Alonso to get in front of Schumacher, Schumacher wasn't able to pass Alonso and Massa won the race.

This would be one recollection of Massa doing well against Schumacher even though Schumacher was a lot quicker.

Massa won two races in 2006, both of which he finished ahead of Schumacher and Alonso

mas wrote:Massa won two races in 2006, both of which he finished ahead of Schumacher and Alonso

I just explained how Massa won in Turkey, in Brazil Schumacher's car failed in Q3 and he had to start 10th, Massa won the race, both Massa's wins came near the end of the season when the Ferrari was the fastest car.

mas wrote:Massa won two races in 2006, both of which he finished ahead of Schumacher and Alonso

Yes, two flukes.

He was so much slower than Schumacher in Turkey (one of the biggest gaps of the year actually) that Ferrari under fueled him by 7 laps for him to get ahead of Alonso. It was a lucky win as the SC came out at the exact time to ruin MS's strategy, there was zero chance to overtake and Massa won.

Brazil, his otherer win. Schumacher broke down in qualifying, started 10th. Then got a puncture on lap 7 when already up to 5th. in the race and dropped a lap behind Massa. Ferrari was the class of the field that day.

Both Schumi and Alonso drove brilliantly throughout (?) '06, whereas in '07 all four contenders made some serious mistakes IIRC.

Same in '08 when neither Lewis or Massa had stellar seasons.

The in-fighting at Mclaren ('07) certainly didn't help their drivers' WDC challenge and, of course it was Alonso, Lewis and Kimi's first year in new teams.

IMO it's impossible to imagine that Schumi wouldn't have won the WDC in both those years.

In the second half of 2006 (from USA until Brazil), Massa scored 52 points and Alonso scored 50 points.

They finished 4-2 in a two car finish in Massa's favour. However, Alonso retired in Hungary and Monza when ahead of Massa. Likewise, Massa retired in China when well behind Alonso. Hence, a more representative score would be 5-4 in Alonso's favour. If you adjust for Alonso's reliability problems in Hungary and Monza, he gains an extra 16 points (and Massa loses 1 point), which means that Alonso ends up on 66 points and Massa on 51 points.

Interestingly enough, Massa and Alonso compared very similarly in 2007 to how they did in the second half of 2006. Alonso had the edge but Massa was very close

If Schumacher was not in the 2006 Ferrari, but instead we had two Massa's. You know what would happen? Everyone would assume that Ferrari and Renault were equal in the second half of 2006.

But of course, Schumacher was there - and thanks to Schumi - we know that Ferrari was comfortably the fastest car in the second half of 2006.

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

yes because a lot of people put kimi and massa on the same level (i think kimi is one step up personally between massa and the alonsos hamiltons) but for those that think he is on massa' level then kimi having new team and car and tyres it must be more of an achievement then if massa had won it. i think its well known that kimi struggled getting heat into the tyres in 07 and 08, especially in quali, which on occasion put him down the grid. but as i say knowing how sensative he is to having the car just right i think it adds to the achievement. plus im pretty sure ferrari didnt go to the lengths that mclaren did to get the car right for him.

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

yes because a lot of people put kimi and massa on the same level (i think kimi is one step up personally between massa and the alonsos hamiltons) but for those that think he is on massa' level then kimi having new team and car and tyres it must be more of an achievement then if massa had won it. i think its well known that kimi struggled getting heat into the tyres in 07 and 08, especially in quali, which on occasion put him down the grid. but as i say knowing how sensative he is to having the car just right i think it adds to the achievement. plus im pretty sure ferrari didnt go to the lengths that mclaren did to get the car right for him.

All these disadvantages yet Kimi still won the title, what disadvantages does he have in present day F1 that seems to hold him back so much?

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

yes because a lot of people put kimi and massa on the same level (i think kimi is one step up personally between massa and the alonsos hamiltons) but for those that think he is on massa' level then kimi having new team and car and tyres it must be more of an achievement then if massa had won it. i think its well known that kimi struggled getting heat into the tyres in 07 and 08, especially in quali, which on occasion put him down the grid. but as i say knowing how sensative he is to having the car just right i think it adds to the achievement. plus im pretty sure ferrari didnt go to the lengths that mclaren did to get the car right for him.

All these disadvantages yet Kimi still won the title, what disadvantages does he have in present day F1 that seems to hold him back so much?

well just look at him. poor old man getting picked on by those vibrant youths.

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

yes because a lot of people put kimi and massa on the same level (i think kimi is one step up personally between massa and the alonsos hamiltons) but for those that think he is on massa' level then kimi having new team and car and tyres it must be more of an achievement then if massa had won it. i think its well known that kimi struggled getting heat into the tyres in 07 and 08, especially in quali, which on occasion put him down the grid. but as i say knowing how sensative he is to having the car just right i think it adds to the achievement. plus im pretty sure ferrari didnt go to the lengths that mclaren did to get the car right for him.

All these disadvantages yet Kimi still won the title, what disadvantages does he have in present day F1 that seems to hold him back so much?

well just look at him. poor old man getting picked on by those vibrant youths.

One of these youths being a 33 year old Alonso when Kimi himself was 35 years old, Kimi must have aged quickly?

sandman1347 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Schumacher would have easily won 2007, and most probably 2008.

Maybe he would have won, maybe not. He didn't win in 2006 and that was a similar situation. To say he would have won easily is a joke.

2006 and 2007 were similar. On which planet?

If Schumacher wasn't there and Ferrari had two Massa-level drivers in 2006, Renault would have looked like the clear best car.

With Alonso winning comfortably in San Marino, Europe, France, China and Japan.

Also, Alonso was in front of Massa when his engine blew up in Monza despite starting 6 places further down the grid. All this while Schumacher was leading that race easily.

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

yes because a lot of people put kimi and massa on the same level (i think kimi is one step up personally between massa and the alonsos hamiltons) but for those that think he is on massa' level then kimi having new team and car and tyres it must be more of an achievement then if massa had won it. i think its well known that kimi struggled getting heat into the tyres in 07 and 08, especially in quali, which on occasion put him down the grid. but as i say knowing how sensative he is to having the car just right i think it adds to the achievement. plus im pretty sure ferrari didnt go to the lengths that mclaren did to get the car right for him.

All these disadvantages yet Kimi still won the title, what disadvantages does he have in present day F1 that seems to hold him back so much?

He's rubbish on the tyres, quite frankly. He's occasionally shown flashes of single lap pace to match / beat Vettel, but almost never translates that into race pace. I can't think of any solid reason beyond tyre management, tbh, which he didn't have in the (Michelin) days when tyres were built purely for performance. In that respect he's a one-trick pony, but that doesn't preclude him being able to use that trick when the planets align.

Fry said Kimi and Montoya shared 9 front ends in a season, in order to get the car exactly where they needed to be. Says a lot about Kimi's sensitivity (as well as McLaren's flexibility and foresight in accommodating their drivers' peccadilloes), but just reinforces the idea that without things being perfect he's a bit all at sea. And that in turn explains his pretty large performance swings, such as e.g. his first season vs Vettel, compared with this current one. He has possibly the biggest performance swings on anyone on the grid (that we're aware of, anyway)

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Caserole of Nonsense wrote:knowing how fickle kimi is with setup, tyres etc i think the achievement of winning the title that year is underestimated by most. remember it was his first year on bridgestones and a new car. the bridgestones were a different beast to what he was used to. massa had all but 1 of his previous seasons on bridgestones and he had driver coach schumacher in his corner. pace wise they were pretty well matched but im sorry massa wasnt and still isnt anywhere near kimi when it comes to race craft. when massa was at the front he was ok. he could put together a good race but was a different driver when starting lower down the grid where he had to work through a field. prone to errors then. and his wet pace was shocking even compared to kimis whose isnt great. i think kimi ultimate level was above massa that year. and he generally carried more fuel in quali then massa which i dont know if the stats take into account.

shuey would probably have beaten kimi that year though.

So basically Kimi did well to win in the fastest car because the car and tyres were new to him and didn't suit him?

The problem with this theory is that Kimi never improved in 2008 and 2009, his performance level to Massa remained quite consistent.

yes because a lot of people put kimi and massa on the same level (i think kimi is one step up personally between massa and the alonsos hamiltons) but for those that think he is on massa' level then kimi having new team and car and tyres it must be more of an achievement then if massa had won it. i think its well known that kimi struggled getting heat into the tyres in 07 and 08, especially in quali, which on occasion put him down the grid. but as i say knowing how sensative he is to having the car just right i think it adds to the achievement. plus im pretty sure ferrari didnt go to the lengths that mclaren did to get the car right for him.

All these disadvantages yet Kimi still won the title, what disadvantages does he have in present day F1 that seems to hold him back so much?

He's rubbish on the tyres, quite frankly. He's occasionally shown flashes of single lap pace to match / beat Vettel, but almost never translates that into race pace. I can't think of any solid reason beyond tyre management, tbh, which he didn't have in the (Michelin) days when tyres were built purely for performance. In that respect he's a one-trick pony, but that doesn't preclude him being able to use that trick when the planets align.

Fry said Kimi and Montoya shared 9 front ends in a season, in order to get the car exactly where they needed to be. Says a lot about Kimi's sensitivity (as well as McLaren's flexibility and foresight in accommodating their drivers' peccadilloes), but just reinforces the idea that without things being perfect he's a bit all at sea. And that in turn explains his pretty large performance swings, such as e.g. his first season vs Vettel, compared with this current one. He has possibly the biggest performance swings on anyone on the grid (that we're aware of, anyway)

Which again brings me around again to he was rubbish on the tyres in 2007 yet he won the title in not the out and out best car, something kind of doesn't add up?