Who thinks Shumacher is overrated?? I think so because he won most of his championships in an era totally dominated by Ferrari. So what i mean is that whoever would have been the leading Ferrari driver at that time would have won all those titles. And in my opinion there are better drivers that won a lot of titles with a car that wasnt so superior than the others.
2007-01-23 06:57:34 · 7 answers · asked by ganapan7 3 in Sports ➔ Auto Racing ➔ Formula One
He did win the Championship many times. and he was able to do it because Ferrari gave him the best car. I think in terms of skill, he was good but not the greatest. He was so used to the car and the team that it really worked well for him and he took advantage of that which made him a 7 time world champion. Anybody would do the same...
I believe there are equally good drivers out there: Hakkinen, Prost, Senna.
2007-01-23 10:46:47 · answer #1 · answered by Eskimo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Overrated? This would depend entirely on just what one thinks of him. But the facts do speak that he should be pretty highly regarded. Statistically he was the most successful driver in Formula 1 ever - and not by a small margin! While he certainly had many people at Ferrari (and Benneton before) that helped, he was at the very least the major part of those equations. The fact that his car often performed so well was as much a measure of his ability to work with his engineers to get the car working correctly as it was a testament to the designers. The fact that he suffered fewer failures than teammates driving the same car spoke the 1) the attention to detail he took in knowing his car and making sure it was as close to 100% as possible on race day, and 2) being sensitive enough as a driver to only push it as far as it could/needed to be to achieve the end results.
I think it is severly underrated what he meant to the team to think that Ferrari would have had the success they had without him. While a few other top notch drivers have been in Formula 1 during Schumacher's career, none were competive tothe same degree over the same length of time. To think that any of them could have simply stepped in at Ferrari and had the same kind of success is to think that winning at that level is easy (if it was, we'd see alot more people winning 7 championships).
Was he the best ever? Statistically yes. Really? Hard to say... just how do you compare Schumacher to Ascari? The different eras have demanded different skills. If Moss or Prost were just coming up today, chances are they would be top notch drivers. And if Schumacher were driving in the 1960 instead of recently, he probably would have still been a top notch driver. Would any of the greats have been as great in another era though? Probably not. Successfull and great yes, but part of what catapults someone to be mentioned as the Best Ever requires something of being the right person for that time. Schumacher arrived in Formula 1 just as it was changing in such a way that would directly fit his strengths. And for what he did with those stengths, he deserves to be considered the best of his era and rightfully can be mentioned in comparisions to Senna or Fangio. Maybe he won't look that good in that comparison, or maybe he will.
2007-01-23 18:02:16 · answer #2 · answered by Paul S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it couldn't be. Everyone always says that mercedes and honda are going to do real well every year even though they have crappy drivers....Result: they suck it up ever year, and I'm sure the same would go for ferrari, anyway wouldn't one think that a top company like ferrari would pick the best driver they possibly could. Not only does Shumacher have a pretty good history before he joined ferrrari but ferrari never did so hot until shumacher came:take this into consideration.
2007-01-23 17:25:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Overrated - no way!
Michael was probably the best at getting the most out of a car and letting it do the work for him. It was this technical expertise at understanding what the car was telling him that assisted Beneton and Ferrari build the car that could win over and over again.
It has been commented that he is the only driver that can talk with his team about the car/race/tactics throughout the entire race. Other drivers will stop talking during times of excessive G-forces and stress.
He is a step up from everyone else and his sucess reflects that.
2007-01-23 15:17:32 · answer #4 · answered by Ships Ahoy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ferrari was not a winning team when Schumacher joined it. He brought his team of engineers along with himself. Ferrari's rise is due to not only his driving skills, but the effect he had on design. Let's see whether Kimi, who cares nothing for the out of car parts of the job, can do as well.
2007-01-23 15:01:57 · answer #5 · answered by Shogun 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree, Schumacher was a great driver, but not the greatest. Hed had (as you mentioned) the best car, but more importantly he never had a main rival like Prost or Senna. Imagine how many titles one of them would have won if the other didn't exist.
2007-01-23 15:02:11 · answer #6 · answered by All in 9121 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no comment......
2007-01-23 19:00:44 · answer #7 · answered by ngongi 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋