Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Why?
Rossi's accomplishments always reminded me quite a bit of Michael Schumacher's....he racked up all the championships and wins when the competition was either dead or retired.
No one gets to pick the era in which they race, but you can judge the quality of competition. It's a fair thing to do.
Joined Oct 2011
307 Posts | 47+
Up ..... Creek
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
So I take it that CS & JL were no competition in 08 & 09? Not doing so bad so far at 36 against a 22 yr old wunderkind this year either, plus beating JL on the same machinery for the start of a second season. Not saying he'll win it or anything, but 16 years in the top class with wins all years except for the Ducati years...
If MM is the only competition you class as quality, what about the myriad of other champions? Did they have no quality competition? Was it only during the Rainey, Schwantz, Gardener, Spencer, Roberts et al era that you feel there was quality of competition?
BTW, Rossi will never remind me of Schumacher - Rossi didn't need to cheat for a start off
Actually saw Iggy play with a version of the Stooges, notably including James Williamson (Scott Asheton was still alive at the time but ailing and not on the tour), in Sydney in 2013, something I never thought I would see when I got my first copy of "Raw Power" in the 70s.
Perhaps Valentino will win the 2015 championship, which will surpass Ago's 8th, particularly as it will be against MM.
Last edited:
Joined Jul 2006
11K Posts | 291+
Texas
Your statements ignorance is bordering on the .........
Even more ........ than Shumach.
Last edited:
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Oh no, I don't like someone's opinion so I'm going to get all sand up in my .......
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Seriously...Schumacher had no real competition from a driver's standpoint after May 1st, 1994. You can make a case for Mika Hakkinen, but he had to wait till 1998 to get a car that worked from McLaren. Even at that, he eventually folded under the pressure in 2000, and was done in 2001.
Schumacher's only real competition was Adrian Newey, and Newey was finished at McLaren once the beryllium V10's got banned; he couldn't design reliable cars. Take away Adrian Newey from Williams, and the 1996 and 1997 titles don't happen.
Joined Mar 2015
2K Posts | 337+
Chertsey, Surrey, UK
For as long as I can remember there have only been 2 or 3 riders per season that could win a championship, the rest are just there to make up the numbers.
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
Newey is an aerodynamicist - he doesn't design reliable or unreliable cars unless his aero design is so poor that bits of the aero package fail, which is not something I particularly recall happening.
You might find this Newey piece interesting if you haven't seen it before Adrian Newey: the magnificent man and his flying machines - Telegraph
Regarding competition, Hill, Villeneuve & Hakkinen (*2) were Newey designed cars, but Alonso also beat him twice to the WC in 05 & 06.
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Actually what Newey did factored greatly into reliability or lack thereof with his cars. His Williams success was down to Patrick Head being there to keep him in check. Car design has been increasingly dictated by aerodynamic packaging. The desire to go slim has a huge impact on how well the car handles cooling.
Consider this, Newey's most successful period on his own without Patrick Head was the 2009-2013 period when regulations were stable. There's a huge reason for this. Back during the Lleyton House days, Newey's cars ran their best as Paul Ricard because the surface there was immaculate in those days, and as such, it didn't upset the balance of the cars the way every other circuit did.
2005 was not really a year I count for Schumacher losing because of how badly Bridgestone ...... up their tire design compared to the Michelins.
Anyway, this is too far off the beaten path now.
Joined Aug 2013
163 Posts | 33+
Northants UK
Actually what Newey did factored greatly into reliability or lack thereof with his cars. His Williams success was down to Patrick Head being there to keep him in check. Car design has been increasingly dictated by aerodynamic packaging. The desire to go slim has a huge impact on how well the car handles cooling.
Consider this, Newey's most successful period on his own without Patrick Head was the 2009-2013 period when regulations were stable. There's a huge reason for this. Back during the Lleyton House days, Newey's cars ran their best as Paul Ricard because the surface there was immaculate in those days, and as such, it didn't upset the balance of the cars the way every other circuit did.
2005 was not really a year I count for Schumacher losing because of how badly Bridgestone ...... up their tire design compared to the Michelins.
Anyway, this is too far off the beaten path now.
You make some very good points there
Newey's cars were often fast but fragile due to the reasons you pointed out. 1999, 2000, and 2005 McLarens spring to mind as quickest cars on the grid but in only one of those years did they take the WDC and no WCC. 2005 especially was a beast but it just broke down all the time, reckon Kimi must have taken 4 engine penalty's that season and some for JPM also.
Good to see someone else with a bit of F1 knowledge on here
Was watching 1989 French GP the other day, not such a good one for leyton house lol, but i think Big Mo set fastest lap
Joined Oct 2011
307 Posts | 47+
Up ..... Creek
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
No need to keep generic threads like this on track so long as other peeps are interested in the discussionActually what Newey did factored greatly into reliability or lack thereof with his cars. His Williams success was down to Patrick Head being there to keep him in check. Car design has been increasingly dictated by aerodynamic packaging. The desire to go slim has a huge impact on how well the car handles cooling.
Consider this, Newey's most successful period on his own without Patrick Head was the 2009-2013 period when regulations were stable. There's a huge reason for this. Back during the Lleyton House days, Newey's cars ran their best as Paul Ricard because the surface there was immaculate in those days, and as such, it didn't upset the balance of the cars the way every other circuit did.
2005 was not really a year I count for Schumacher losing because of how badly Bridgestone ...... up their tire design compared to the Michelins.
Anyway, this is too far off the beaten path now.
IMHO Newey is an aerodynamicist and any team without overall System designers ( / architects, call 'em what you will) will end up with the most capable designer driving the car design. This is not the fault of the aerodynamicist, nor the engine designer should it turnout that he is the stronger, rather a failure of the team to have someone who can see the bigger picture and balance aero design with good cooling, exhaust routing etc, etc,
It happens in commercial auto manufacturers (I currently contract with JLR as a Systems Engineer in Powertrain) as well as F1 teams, where the designers of each sub-system are quite likely geniuses, and their particular bit may be stunning. However, melding them into an overall winning (or even working
) vehicle is not possible as no-one considered the interfaces between sub-systems (the bigger picture) before the individual sub-systems were fixed in stone.TLDR; version: Newey can't be blamed for not being a Systems Engineer, but history shows that in conjunction with a good one, his aero designs have been little short of brilliant.
Last edited:
Joined Oct 2008
6K Posts | 5K+
In Cider
