Cronios said:
Renault as a team was much more balanced and durable than Ferrari last year,
Ferrari was less reliable than ever, Schumacher lost his last title hopes because of an engine failure and that was hardly Alonso's skill on the tracks, Alonso won two championships full of 2 and 3rd places, he wasnt always the fastest but his car was always competitive under any circumstances and also was by far the most reliable.A driver cant be responsible for his team reliability, he is directly benefiting from that though and gain extra favor in front of the competition,
favor with a different origin than driving skills.
In my eyes Alonso is still untested without this favor.
Mclaren was traditionally the less reliable "big" team but so far both drivers had a perfect record.
Right now, from this point of view Alonso was really really lucky again, to be a part of a team without reliability or balance problems.(and most important, that team used to be up until now, used to be, THE less balanced and reliable)
Ferrari had the best tradition on this section, but the last 3-4 years they even fail to deliver there too, thats the only reason that keeps them from winning...
Last year and the year before Ferrari was a lot less reliable than Renault that is true, they were two unusual seasons for them you could say, however I did not say Alonso didn't have the best car and most reliable car, quite the opposite, I only said Schumacher was no different. He won championships and races always with the most competitive car, yet at the end of his career the situation changes, a great young driver overturns him and now everyone start calling him lucky? Come on, you can be lucky for a race or two, you can't be lucky for two whole championships. Lots of 2nd and 3rd places? He was first in 7 races in both seasons! I'm sorry but that is nothing to be ashamed of, not everyone can drive a Ferrari with the strongest and most reliable engine BY FAR for 5 straight years. Lots of world chamiponships were won that way, having more than 50% of wins in a season is a remarkable feat which requires a dominant car and a great driver(hint Schummi). Senna won his second championship in'90 with just 5 wins.
So what are you saying, in order to prove himself he must start having engine failures? What kind of a logic is that? In seasons 2001-2004, Schumacher had only 4 retirements! 4!!! In one season he had NONE RETIREMENTS AT ALL OK, I'm sorry than Michael we'll wipe those 4 titles away from you, you had it too easy, you practically retired only once per race, that is just too lucky! OK everyone, from now on Schumacher has won only 3 championship titles, the other four he was just lucky. Alonso in his last 2 years in Renault had only 4 retirements, the same number Schumacher had in 4 years, which one was luckier to have such a good and reliable car? No sorry, I don't buy it. Luck is one thing, having a good car and knowing how to use it and win a championship with it, is a whole different case.
Alonso is as aproven as they get, he won two chamiponships and in a time when of the biggest ever drivers raced and he was dominant. That speaks enough for me, will he be bigger than Michael? Highly unlikely, but hey if McLaren somehow develop such a fast and reliable car that will not have engine failure for the next 5 years, he just might do it, after all that's how Schumacher got his abundance of titles.
I think i gave an answer to that, i even said that even before the championship,
i couldnt quess that Renault would be THAT bad already, though, but i was sure they wouldnt be competitive, the situation really speaks for it self, its a budget thing, they were about to withdraw their competition. They couldnt afford a decent pilot, they fell back in car's development.
While Ferrari,BMW and Mclaren were more eager, for the title, than ever before
and they would invest more than usual in order to make a leap forwards and overcome the unwilling to invest more, while winning, Renault.
Anyways FIA doesnt want/"allow" the same team to be the winner every year, because of the decreased interest in F1 that way, there are many other reasons too...
I can agree to that to some extent, Ferrari was always the team with the biggest budget, McLaren a second. However after having two dominant season I'm sure they didn't got "fed up" with winning and lost the eagerness to compete, they suffered a huge blow when Alonso left as they knew they couldn't find a decent replacement out there, the only that springs to mind is Kimi and he left to Ferrari, it's natural the whole team moral went down and car developent suffered. It takes a good driver not just to drive the car, he has to know the car and know how to wotk with the team, Kovalainen is not quite there yet and Fisichella is obviously not quite up to the task. Alonso had lots more to do with their weak season then you give him credit for.
I m a ferrari fan, i ve always been a ferrari fan, i would have been a ferrari fan even if Shumi would choose another team.
I care and suffer the most, of the ferrari's lack of performance,
i suffer knowing that ferrari has the driver able to win the championship (both Schumi was and Kimi are able, Alonso would be too) but it is the car that lacks performance overall and struggles to beat the most competitive car every year.
In my point of view Ferrari has a great budget, (nearly unlimited, other teams complain) almost every year and they are always competitive for the titles, while the other teams have a few bursts of form (that i believe are bound to their yearly budget and FIAs changes on rules and other occasional reasons)
Sorry but that's the case in the last few years, you didn't honestly expect that dominance which started with the millenium to last forever?
Where did i mention Schumi?
Seriously i used to like Alonso too, but i dislike unproven and overrated pilots, (despite the press trying to make us believe tall Webber, British pride Button and Us of A pride Montoya as the new F1 phenomenon, i insisted Kimi and Fernando are the real talents from the very first races i ve seen them)
of course Alonso is a very talented and skillful driver and he can win anyone while having the best car (overall), (even Villeneuve did that too )
BUT, since in the modern age, the difference between the teams is much more crucial than the difference between drivers,
Schumacher was one of the last drivers that had the chance or even the "privilege" to win a championship while driving a less competitive car, he proved himself in a way, noone can repeat today. Schumi earned respect with the hard way and he was proven again and again under any circumstances. Alonso at this age cant be (already) better than Shumi was, after all those years of exp, in any way, it is really unfair to judge with the same standards, unequal proportions.
A champion cant be "just" lucky, of course, luck is not enough, but skill isnt neither...
But same times when the difference is bound to made by the slightest detail,
a little extra skill or luck can all the difference necessary for the ultimate win.
Skill determines a man, his caracter and caracteristics, it is the ultimate goal for everyone and the exemple to follow.
But luck is smth unmeasurable, unfair and unpreddicted, it is an irritating fact for some ppl that it determines the fates of men though.
It is a normal thing that ppl would love and feel compassion/admiration for the efforts of the proven skillful and unlucky man than the efforts of a lucky and potentially unskilled young man who is yet to be proven against the real problems of life...
TBPH I wasn't a fan of Alonso, I'm not exactly a fan now also, the one and only driver I was a fan of was Senna. I liked Kimi, I like Alonso, I never liked Montoya
, that's because I've always had a soft spot for McLaren because of Senna, plus as a kid I was learned to love them, sort of a family thing. What I'm trying to say is I'm not defending Alonso because I'm a fan of his, no, I'm defending him because Schumacher fans make me sick TBH, nothing personal of course, I have nothing against you as a person, just when it comes to Schumacher people tend to be so overly unobjective and unfair. I've had fights and fights and fights in high school over Schumacher, much similar to this dicsussion we are having now. I can agree to most of what you said in this last paragraph, the times are changing and the car is becoming more and more important, but I don't accept it's just the car, the driver has to have it in him as well, it's a lot of things mixed together. Of course the 2 can't be compaired, times are changing of course and the standards with them, for that same reason I can't accept that Schumacher is the best ever driver, the most succesful he is obviously, but not the best. Why? Because everything is changing drastically with the years, from the engine to the technology. Nicky Lauda was not just being crazy when he said a monkey could drive a F1 car today, there is some truth in that, drivers were a lot more important in previous years. Though I can't agree completelly that Schumacher won a championship with a less competitive car, both in Benneton and Ferrari he had a competitive car but true, not as dominant as he had it with Ferrari from 2000 and on, for that I can give him credit, but not those 5 years which were just ridiculous.
Buy on AliExpress.com
