Michael Schumacher, Lewis Hamilton, Sepang, 2012

Hamilton is a more complete and cleaner driver than Schumacher, says Webber

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Mark Webber offers his view on the performance of F1’s two most successful drivers ever, Michael Schumacher and Lewis Hamilton.

Show which drivers and teams you are supporting

Which F1 drivers and teams are you supporting this season? Here's how you can show your support for your favourite on the grid on RaceFans:

  • Log in with your RaceFans account (sign up here if you don't have one)
  • Select Edit My Profile from the top-right menu
  • Select F1 Teams and Drivers
  • Make your selections then click Save Changes

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Is F1 taking too great a risk by continuing to race as Coronavirus spreads?

I can guarantee you that if the virus were to spread among the race fan attendees and they return to their countries, the promoters and F1 will be vilified by every nation in the world for being greedy.

Lots of public sporting events are being cancelled or participants only, it’s the only prudent thing to do right now to help prevent the spread of the virus.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Fred Schechter!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

  • 30 years ago today Minardi achieved the only front row start of their 340 races in Formula 1. Pierluigi Martini lapped the Phoenix street course just 0.067s slower than pole-sitter Gerhard Berger, who took pole position in his first race as a McLaren driver.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories RaceFans Round-upTags , , ,

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 92 comments on “Hamilton is a more complete and cleaner driver than Schumacher, says Webber”

    1. Webber’s right. And 2010s class of the field is much more talented Than the 2000s: Rosberg, Max, Vettel, Leclerc, Riccardo vs R. Schumacher, Montoya, Barrichello, Coulthard, Massa

      1. Schumacher raced Senna, and he was on Senna’s level fighting with him, so that excuse that this last generation is better, when people state Senna was the best is a contradiction. So thats the first point.
        Senna was the best, but Schumacher who was fighting with Senna isn’t as good as Hamilton, why because Hamilton is now the one that wins with the super powerful untouchable Mercedes, the car that beats all the records from most dominant car… I don’t buy the argument, sorry but don’t buy it.

        But thats not my main reason for saying Schumacher was better, my main reason for saying Schumacher was better than Hamilton, is that Schumacher all the years he stayed in f1, he was favorite to win the title, and Hamilton had a lot of off years. Until Hamilton wasn’t near 30, he wasn’t winning masively like now with Mercedes, and even Rosberg defeated him 1 year. Rosberg!! Yes Rosberg beat him, nobody touched Michael with his same car…
        At that point before Mercedes superior hybrid era, Vettel was 4 titles, Alonso 2, Button 1, Hamilton 1. So at this point if you ask anybody they will say Hamilton was another more, nothing special, not even compare him to greatests drivers in history. But now boom boom Mercedes era, 6 titles (1 lost to Rosberg) and boooom he’s the best of all times, sorry but i don’t buy it. And I’m a Hamilton fan from lot of years, but for me it’s clear Schumacher was better, he was untaouchable in his era. He was the Loeb, the Rossi, the Makinnen of f1. Untouchable and all years fighting for the championship. Even he had the balls to leave the best car and the comfortable position, go to a broken team like Ferrari and win with them and dominate. Now winning with Ferrari seems mission impossible (instead of win now philosophy)

        1. untouchable in his era? what about those 2 championships he lost to Mikka Hakkinen? you are too biased, need to start looking at things from another perspective as well.
          i’m not saying hamilton is the best, i’m just saying your statement about Schumi is wrong.

          1. Im not biased, and saw the 2 eras fully, both are my favourite drivers. So im telling you from my point of view my neutral opinion. The easiest thing to do is to forget others people history fast and jist remember actual things. If i were biased i will say Hamilton (the one that is winning aanow). But even im a Hamilton fan i cannot forget all the Vettel years of dominance where he was untoichable too, only stopped by chamge of rules. So thats the reason. Schumacher was the full package, Hamilton is very very good driver but he’s not full package in being a leader, developing or make a
            group and a good team spirit (remember when he was with Rosberg) and im honest, and he isnt fully 100% dedicated proffesional, so in the end all that matters, and thats why he had some off years, Rosberg beat him because he wasnt taking Rosberg threat seriously and thats a fact, other things are excuses.
            So call me biased i will say im not biased, and Schumacher seeing the things with perspective, was better.
            No more to say, and im not going to enter in a battle. Also Webber isnt Schumachers best friend…. So while we can accept his opinion, its the easiest thing to say now after the Mercedes era of dominance,not cutted by change of rules…
            If you ask everybody in the previous era who was the best all will say Schumacher no doubt. In this era 5 years ago all said Vettel, 10 years ago all say Alonso, today they say Hamilton or Verstappen… If Leclerc wins with Ferrari they will say Leclerc… People change opinion from year to year.

            1. Alex I supported Schumacher when he was racing, but I have to admit that he was massively helped by having contracts that stopped his teammates from being allowed to compete with him. Hamilton has never had that advantage.

              We’ve all seen how Ferrari operate with team orders, still to this day, never mind what it was like with Schumacher and Barrichello. Even at Benetton. Just read this from Johnny Herbert when he was teammates with Schumi:

              At least three of his four world titles have been won with help. I don’t remember Ayrton Senna or Alain Prost ever needing anything like that.”
              “It’s the absolute worst. I don’t know how he can do it. I don’t know how he can feel he’s really world champion, although I’m sure he will be champion again this year.”

              “He has won by batting down his team mate and it’s not the first time he’s done it. This year at the San Marino Grand Prix he took Rubens’s car when Rubens was quicker than him before qualifying. Michael has never had to address the very first challenge a driver faces, which is beating the only guy in the same machinery.”

              Herbert was Schumacher’s team mate at Benetton in 1995 and has first hand experience of what it’s like to partner the current champion: “I know what it’s like to be Michael’s team mate,” he added. “When I joined Michael at Benetton the team had just won the world title and I thought it was an opportunity for me to do the same. So I said publicly I wanted to win the world title. But when Michael was asked about that he said I was ‘getting political’.”

              “That was when the problems began. At the Argentinian Grand Prix all Michael’s data was taken away after practice so that I couldn’t look at it and get the benefit. He saw mine, of course. Refusing to let me see his was something he asked for and the team agreed to it. The team shouldn’t allow it. Ordering Rubens to give way wasn’t fair. If he’d refused, I’m sure they’d have got rid of him. The silly part is he doesn’t need to do it this way. He’s only damaging himself.”

              I think it’s just better to appreciate that all world champions have strengths and weaknesses relative to each other and appreciate what they excelled in. Hamilton’s racecraft is exceptional. Schumacher’s ability to manage intra-team politics so that he has the full team behind his charge for the championship has to also be respected.

          2. “what about those 2 championships he lost to Mikka Hakkinen?”

            Besides Hakkinen also being an amazing driver of his time… Don’t forget Schumacher, in 1999 didn’t compete in 7 rounds of the Championship due to 2 broken legs. Eddie Irvine did respectable, but not Schumacher level. As his return saw him to 2 podium finishes at the end of the season, after being out of the car.

          3. Hakkinen drove the McLaren featuring the 2nd brake pedal in 1998. I’m not knocking Mika for his driving, he was a true Champion. I just wanted to point out that rules in any era are being stretched by the engineers. (since there is so much being said of Ferrari lately)

            1. That was never raced IIRC.

        2. even Rosberg defeated him 1 year. Rosberg!! Yes Rosberg beat him, nobody touched Michael with his same car…

          Except when Rosberg spanked him on merit and not due to lopsided reliability as with the Hamilton comparison… awkward.

          1. Hamilton pre-Mercedes was still in the conversation of greatness. He lost to Vettel whilst he had a dominant Red Bull. He lost to JB in his dominant Brawn. He beat Alonso in his debut season.

            He had some ups and downs in those spells. But he won races and pole positions on plenty of weekends he had no business doing so. I criticised him back then, I was a Button fan but Lewis shouldn’t have fallen apart like he did when they were teammates. I think in 09 his head dropped because he didn’t have the machinery. Etc.

            But saying that nobody would have considered him great based on his years prior to joining Mercedes is just simply inaccurate. He was brilliant from day one. And on day one he was 22 years old.

          2. When you talk about Rosberg’s win, or Hamilton’s only defeat in the Hibred era, don’t forget Malaysia 2016 and Hamilton’s DNF from pole position.


            This was the year when the garages servicing the respective drivers were swapped around, so Hamilton
            had Rosberg’s old mechanics with their divided loyalties, whilst Rosberg had Hamilton’s mechanics
            who were only use to success. By the season’s end there was only 5 points in it. Go figure.

      2. Webber says he THINKs so he’s not sure himself!

        1. Mark is simply acknowledging that what he is saying is no more than his opinion. If he had of used the word “believe” then yes we would know he is an elogical delusional sheep basing his premises on fairy tales.

      3. what’s wrong with Montoya? He was top notch…

    2. Hamilton is a more complete and cleaner driver than Schumacher

      Cleaner yes, although that is not a high benchmark.

      More complete? No. Schumacher was better at driving a difficult car to drive than Hamilton is. Schumacher could drive around his machinery’s limitations in a way Hamilton cannot.

      I have never seen Hamilton win a race that I thought Schumacher couldn’t win. However, I doubt Hamilton could have done what Schumacher did at Spain 1996 or China 2006.

      1. “ Schumacher was better at driving a difficult car to drive than Hamilton is.”

        Have you any evidence of this? The Mercedes were difficult cars to drive, how did he fair then?

        It’s funny how so many people who’ve raced and worked with both men have said Hamilton is the all round better driver, gets countered with statement like what you wrote.

        1. Have you any evidence of this? The Mercedes were difficult cars to drive, how did he fair then?

          Haha of course, that’s why Bottas and Rosberg are strugging to score any podiums with these Mercedes cars. Oh wait.

          It’s funny how so many people who’ve raced and worked with both men have said Hamilton is the all round better driver

          There are also plenty of people who think that Schumacher was the better driver.

          Anyway, I’m not interested in arguments from authority. If you can name drives from Hamilton on par with Schumacher’s greatest, go ahead.

      2. When drivers who’ve actually partnered with & raced against Schumacher (Irvine, Villenueve, Massa, Rosberg, Weber, Alonso to name a few… most of who have experience racing Hamilton as well) as well as Giants of the sport who’ve been big-wigs in teams that both of them won championships for as well (Aldo Costa, Ross Brawn) have all gone on record more than once (they keep getting asked) saying Lewis Hamilton is a more complete driver than Michael Schumacher, I’ll take their word for it, thanks.

        1. Eddie Irvine: Michael Schumacher was another level than Lewis Hamilton

          That’s at least one driver who has said something that directly contradicts your claim. I haven’t bothered looking up the rest, but I wager to guess that a lot of those people you mentioned didn’t actually say that Hamilton is a better driver than Schumacher.

          I do remember Alonso stating that Schumacher was his greatest ever rival. I also remember him saying that Hamilton is in the same league as Senna, Schumacher, Prost, etc… but I don’t recall him saying that he’s above.

          Anyway those are all just arguments from authority. Not interested in arguments from that fallacy.

          1. @kingshark
            Irvine never raced Hamilton, not that he raced Schumacher much either.

            1. @megatron
              I merely pointed out that his claim that “Irvine said Hamilton is better than Schumacher” is completely false.

        2. Schumacher was hated and feared by his rivals, nobody on his era admited he was the best by far, NOBODY on his era will go on microphone to say that. If you don’t know that its because you only know f1 from nowadays. Verstappen said lot of crap about Schumacher, Irvine too (even know he’s being honest with himself, but he never said that until recently, he always said bad things), Barrichello (too), they all finished burned by Schumacher’s dominance, its normal.
          Nobody admited Vettel greatness while he was smashing everybody one year and another, you will never hear from Alonso that Vettel smashes them that years… He’ll never admit, its an ego thing.
          He prefers to say Hamilton is better because he wasn’t his rival in the years he lost the championships against Vettel. So that opinions are more than biased. Drivers opinions are biased by their experiences.
          So if you want to buy the opinion of a driver or other type of person like that, its up to you, because 3 years ago everybody said in magazines, press or whatever that Alonso was the best of his generation. They change the opinion, like they change clothes.

      3. Adelaide 1994, Jerez 1997, Monaco 2006, etc…

        1. Schumacher was indeed a very dirty driver. He never scooped as low as Senna did at Suzuka 1990, but he was still a dirty driver nonetheless.

          That doesn’t disprove my point though. The fact that Hamilton is cleaner than Schumacher does not make him better.

          Kimi Raikkonen has always been a cleaner and fairer driver than Lewis Hamilton. That doesn’t make him better.

          1. Jerez 1997 was as bad as Suzuka 1990. same intent, different end result. senna’s was more dangerous, but they were equally blatant attempts to take another car out of the race. instant black flag material in any level of motorsport.

            hamilton has joined the elite of the sport because of his amazing results. his win ratio is astonishingly high for this era. as ever we cannot compare across the different generations – this has always been the case (is nuvolari superior to stewart? no one knows!) but i guess now, with the way the internet is, the arguments will be more pointlessly stupid and bitter.

            1. Suzuka was far worse because it was much higher speed. It was a big crash. Senna could have easily killed prost or both of them. Or taken out half of the field or killed track marshall with debris. Jerez incident was child play in comparison. Both incidents were intentional but senna went far far deeper into the possible manslaughter realms with his ferocious attack. Schumi tried to damage villeneuve’s car. Senna tried to kill prost.

            2. Senna wouldn’t ever do a Suzuka 90 if it weren’t for the Suzuka 89 to happen first. Having the title robbed by Balestre paved the way for the 90 race later on. Schumacher was much dirtier, 94 and 97 done when he suddenly cracked under pressure.

            3. It was a different era were drivers defended the position harder and pushing more the limits!! Senna was a very hard driver, and like you will call it very “dirty”. So saying Schumacher was very dirty its a joke. Schumacher learned from the previous drivers like Senna and Prost, same mentality.
              Verstappen’s son has learned from there, so if you are honest or objective to yourself. Is the fan loved Verstappen a dirty driver? By your standars you will have to call him ultra dirty, because he had incidents and collisions with more than half of the grid…
              So its Verstappen a “genious”, a “spectacle master”, or whatever you can call him, or a very dirty driver????
              Fans are like that, what they like they look to the other side and don’t admit the truth.

            4. @frood19 A difference that I would say makes what Senna did at Suzuka in 1990 far worse is that he went into that race with the intention of taking Prost out at turn 1 if he got the better start.

              I think Jerez 1997 was a spur of the moment thing in the same was Adelaide 1994 was. He never went into either race planning to take out his title rival, It was a split second reaction to what was happening at the time.

          2. If Hamilton can acheive what he’s achieve without resorting to dirty driving [or blatant ch**ting], how does that not make Hamilton the better driver?

            Are you saying Schumacher would have done as well without dirty driving. Or do you include that as fair
            and a required part of any driver’s arsenal?

      4. @kingshark “ Anyway those are all just arguments from authority. Not interested in arguments from that fallacy.”

        Lol, yeah because your argument is much more objective and reliable.
        You’ve never “seen” Hamilton do what Schumacher did, or you “doubt” that he could have.
        Let’s ask the mail man or some random bloke in his armchair what he’s “seen” or “felt” Hamilton or Schumacher could or couldn’t do.

        If there’s no metric involved and the whole argument is just a feeling, than I‘ll take the word from someone with authority and experience over yours every day of the week.
        It’s a fallacy in itself to believe that the argument from authority is flawed in every situation.

        1. Can you point out on the doll where his opinion of Lewis hurt you so personally?

          1. Dale – Great comment. I’d offer you a chockie frog, but eaten them all.

          2. As often, just below the belt.

      5. @kingshark

        Schumacher could drive around his machinery’s limitations in a way Hamilton cannot.

        You mean the way Schumacher demonstrated when he got beaten by Rosberg three seasons in a row while he kept on complaining the car didn’t suit his driving style?

        The actual fact is that Schumacher always had the car specifically tailored to him. His team mate got no attention and just had to deal with a car that didn’t suit them.

        1. In his last season, he was actually faster than Rosberg, but got let down a lot by the Mercedes or other circumstances when in points scoring positions. The Mercedes team faded in the 2nd half of the season, so no more big point to overhaul Rosberg.

        2. “The actual fact is that Schumacher always had the car specifically tailored to him. His team mate got no attention and just had to deal with a car that didn’t suit them.”
          So it is not an excuse for Schumacher but an excuse for every other teammate he ever had. You are claiming Benetton did nothing for Brundle or Patrese but everything for Schumacher, even though he had only drive a few grand prix? Or maybe teams built cars around Schumacher because he was faster then anyone else.

        3. The actual fact is that Schumacher always had the car specifically tailored to him. His team mate got no attention and just had to deal with a car that didn’t suit them.


          The actual fact is that Schumacher always had the car specifically developed by his feedback to the engineers. His team mate got the benefit of driving the car he helped fine tune.

          And I would think Hamilton could be thanking Schumacher for his time at Mercedes as he had a hand in the direction of it’s race development prior to Hamilton stepping in.

      6. 100% correct Kingshark. Drivers remember and other people directly involved in F1 know a lot more than us and their opinions should be respected.

    3. @kingshark

      This is all very difficult to quantify, but this is what us fans do, we will debate and argue till the cows come home…haha

      Lewis can only achieve what’s been set out in front him, and that is the best car and team. He has utilised both to devastating effect, and who can blame him? He is a brilliant driver who is doing is job at an astounding level of efficiency.

      I agree with you on Schumacher’s ability to drive around issues, and drag difficult cars into decent positions. When he joined Ferrari in 96, the car was a dog. Eddie Irvine said in an interview that it took him 3 years to get anywhere close to Michael.

      Lewis has had the benefit of having decent cars for most of his career (shielding myself from the impending onslaught!). Apart from 09, most of his other cars were quite good, backed up by the fact that aside from 09, his teammates also won races in all other years? I mean can you imagine Lewis driving a bad car? He even complains now! I’d love to see Lewis in a middling car to see what he can do. As Sebastien Vettel has found out, not having the magic silver bullet and being the class of the field, can prove to be quite difficult…because you cant make mistakes and get away with it when you’re actually under pressure and fighting.

      1. @jaymenon10
        Watch Australia 2009, Hamilton drove a complete pos car to a podium(only to be unprecedentedly disqualified for an off track infraction). Hamilton is much more complete driver than Schumacher, and makes far fewer mistakes.

        Furthermore Hamilton did not have a besoke tire advantage or his own test track.

        1. @megatron

          Watch Australia 2009

          Doesn’t even come close to China 2006, let alone Spain 1996.

          Furthermore Hamilton did not have a besoke tire advantage or his own test track.

          But Hamilton did have a huge PU advantage from 2014-2016, and other teams could not catch up thanks to the stupid token system.

          Whether Schumacher or Hamilton enjoyed a bigger advantage when they dominated is not really relevant. The crux of my argument is that Schumacher was significantly more impressive than Hamilton when the car was difficult to drive.

          1. @kingshark
            Hamilton has a dozen drives equal to or better than spain 96 or china 06. Japan 07, Silverstone 08, Brazil 16 to name a couple. A PU advantage is no advantage in the wet, whereas the Bridgestone inters were better than the Michelin inters. When the car was difficult to drive nobody has shined more than Senna and Hamilton.

            Also, the token system didn’t really hold anyone back and actually held Merc back the most if any.

            1. @megatron
              In all those great Hamilton drives you listed, he had the best car. Schumacher dominated with a donkey of a car at Spain 1996.

              Bridgestone inters were better than the Michelin inters

              Wrong. Michelin inters were far superior to Bridgestone inters in 2006. So superior that Schumacher was the only Bridgestone driver who even made it into Q3. Schumacher had no business even sniffing a podium at China 2006, let alone a win.

            2. Megatron, you never saw Schumacher era, did you? When you began watching F1 tell the truth?

          2. @kingshark
            Matter of fact Hamilton’s drives in the wet are actually more impressive because he didn’t have traction control unlike Schumacher who had it both

            1. @megatron Traction control wasn’t legal in 1996 when Michael blew everyone away in Spain in a car that wasn’t especially good at the time.

              The most equivalent wet win for Lewis was probably Japan 2007 when they still had traction control & he was in what was probably the best car on the grid that weekend.

          3. @kingshark
            Matter of fact Hamilton’s drives in the wet are actually more impressive because he didn’t have traction control unlike Schumacher who had it both legally and illegally. So Hamilton with a more powerful and torquey engine and no TC vs Schumacher running illegal TC. Hamilton more impressive.

            1. TC didn’t come back until Spain 2001.

              Schumacher was peerless in the wet throughout the 90’s.

          4. What was so great about spain 1996 anyway? Panis did the same in Monaco. When only 6 cars arrive at the finish it’s mostly a lottery which 6 those are. Schumacher demonstrated just before that that he just as easily put his car in the wall in the same conditions. Schumacher was lucky to get away woith a crash during the Spain race itself even.

            Besides, Schumacher even stated that the exhaust issue he had made sure the power delivey was less. Which made it much easier to driver his car in the rain.

            1. spain 1996 was one of the all-time great drives. he was over a minute ahead at one stage. schumacher backed this up with his drives in monaco in 1997 (he was out of sight after a lap) and spa in 1997 when he was lapping up to 12 seconds quicker than the rest.

              both hamilton and schumacher have had awesome drives in the wet and dry – why does one being awesome have to exclude the other?

            2. both hamilton and schumacher have had awesome drives in the wet and dry – why does one being awesome have to exclude the other?

              Amen @frood19

            3. @f1osaurus
              Schumacher was going 3 seconds per lap quicker than anyone else in the rain in what was nowhere near the best car.

              If you can give an example of Hamilton doing something similar, go ahead.

              The only time Hamilton had a truly bad car was the first half of 2009. The equivalent of Spain 1996 would be if Hamilton dominated in the rain at China 2009 despite his inferior car (in reality he spun several times an finished behind Kovalainen).

            4. @f1osaurus Monaco was wet/dry & Panis came to the front partly thanks to cars ahead retiring & partly due to good tyre choice.

              In Spain Michael utterly dominated that race. He overtook 4-5 cars to take the lead on track & was then seconds faster than anyone else in conditions that were far worse than anything seen at Monaco. He also had an engine issue & was running on I think 8 cylinders at the end & was still faster than anyone else.

        2. Tyre advantage?! I think I’ll leave that aside. Ferrari is known more for conservatorism, yet you forget to mention they always were on the back foot regarding the tyres too: they sticked to Goodyear when Bridgestone proved to be a more performant tyre, they used Bridgestone when Michelin proved to be a better tyre etc. They’re quite a loyal team to their partners…

      2. The best artists have the best brushes, but even without the best brushes they are still great artists. The best musicians have the best instruments, but even without having a great instrument on hand they are still great musicians. The same applies here: teams want the best driver they can afford. The question isn’t so much “What if Lewis hadn’t gotten to drive for a front running team when he arrived in F1?”, but “What if none of the teams noticed his talent?” because once he’d gotten into F1 it was inevitable he’d end up driving for a front running team. While it seems inconceivable that any team would overlook his talent, this is actually a serious problem for F1 because now, since the introduction of the SuperLicence Points system, it makes it so teams can only look at a small pool of drivers, and if a team happens to notice a very talented driver who doesn’t have the prerequisite points then they have to ignore that driver and instead employ someone from the pool. If, by chance, it happened that Lewis hadn’t gotten the points necessary to be in F1 then he’d still have gotten to race a car, just it’d be in another racing series.

        1. COTD right there @drycrust

    4. @kingshark I agree.
      That said on your 2 argument, both have won some pretty epic races, I’m not that certain on that point. I think eras come into play, also, I think Ham’s cars were, on average, more competitive than Michael’s.
      the early years even the 94 car were pegged back by Ford, having Renault in 95 showed that, the 96 cars was far from great, the 98 was on the wrong tyre and the 2010-2012 were not able to win races. I felt his comeback was only going to stain his legacy, in the end I got a lot more respect for him, that Monaco non pole was epic, not a perfect lap but he got it whereas the rest failed.
      I don’t know whose contracts Webber has access to, but Irvine always denies these contract claims yet they don’t fit the narrative, I guess people know Irvine’s contracts better than him.

    5. I think for me this whole issue is down to who is better in a bad car. Schumi could drive round an issue Hammilton cant. In the season whete MacLaren but him a shocker of a car he never once but more than 1 grid spot between himself and Kovalinen. When that car was better he showed he could win in it and Kovy couldnt. So why couldnt he show just how much better he was in a poor car? As we have seen in 2 races with Mercedes Hamilton at Singapore even with the best car he went missing and wasnt extracting what he should have been able to. The Vettel comparison is spot on also. Give Seb the car he will win you the titles Red Bull found that, but apply pressure and hes found at Ferrari he cant do that. I seriously doubt that if you put Hamilton in a car that isnt perfect that he can make the difference.

      1. 2009 china (3rd race) Hamilton qualed 9th, Heikki qualed 12th. It’s like you people make up any old bs. The next race in Bahrain HAM qualed 5th, Heikki qualed 11th. Next race Spain, HAM 14th, KOV 18th.

      2. “I seriously doubt that if you put Hamilton in a car that isnt perfect that he can make the difference.”

        Oh really?

    6. He’s dumber than David Coultard… (The last syllable is the hint.) Ban me for life I don’t care! Currently F1 is like watching you’re auntie’s undies drying on the clothes line. You are all welcome to watch them dry.

      1. @alex-bkk why do you seem to be so proud of yourself for throwing around an offensive term for mentally disabled people at a person who does actually have a mental disability (Hamilton having revealed a few years ago that he suffers from severe dyslexia)? Well, if you want that ban, you seem to be going about the right way of getting one with that sort of attitude.

        1. Dyslexia is not a mental disability of the sort he means.
          But these qualifications are unwanted.

    7. I think Nico Rosberg is the most complete, clean, and multilingual racing driver; he beat both of them as teammates and has not been beaten since.

      1. @coldfly “Clean” though? He pushed people off on the straight which even prompted a rules change to prevent the behavior. Although he got away with the same offence several times later anyway. Spain 2016 being a notable example.

        Or his antics in Monaco? Or setting a pole lap in Hungary when double waved yellow was going on. Or crashing into Hamilton at Spa on purpose, to “prove a point”. The list goes on and on.

        1. OK, let’s drop ‘clean’ and both agree he is the most complete and multilingual F1 driver, @f1osaurus.

      2. don’t be a twit

    8. The amount of angry comments in here LOL
      It’s not the off season anymore, it’s RACE WEEK.
      You guys need to chill

      1. I agree with abe. But to throw fuel on The fire… Ham did not have a second driver doing all his test runs throughout the week. Or contracts saying u must finish behind him. Or a whole team that designed a car to his liking only. What we should agree on is in both eras both drivers have extracted the maximum from the cars and teams making them very very successful. They both have longevity being at the top for soo many years. Both have great races that we can recall. Both did some great driving too. Let statistics speak for itself. Its all in the numbers…

        1. Schummi did not have the advantages a simulator offers.
          Driving as much as you could on a track in preparation.

        2. How come Bottas has been used as rear gunner for Hamilton from 2017-19 if it isn’t contractual?

          Barrichello was never used as a rear gunner like Bottas has been.

    9. Thanks to coronavirus, Italy is now on lockdown. Will F1’s considerable Italian contingent be allowed a pass to come and go? If not, the next few races will surely have to be cancelled.

      1. They are already outside Italy.
        The problem will arise with development parts from the factory.

        1. I hope they’ve taken enough front wings with them.

    10. There is no doubt that Hamilton was a cleaner driver, no need to remind Jerez 1997 etc. I would probably agree that he is more complete in terms of qualifying pace, race pace, avoiding costly mistakes.

      The fundamental thing though that Schumacher achieved and I think no other driver on the grid ever achieved is that he joined a dog of a team, with a dog of a car and through sheer determination and hard work plus plenty of patience, 5 years and 2 broken legs – he made them champions. That is something unrepeated so far and Alonso, Vettel know it better than anyone.

    11. Both of these drivers are multiple world champions and Mark Webber isnt.

    12. Schumacher’s technical ability to set up the car and especially to adapt his driving style to what was necessary was second to none and that was demonstrated straight away since he joined Benetton. At first, the engineers couldn’t believe what Michael was saying till the car’s data logging was improved. He was so technical and data driven, even more than Senna was.
      On the other hand, Hamilton spent his first year copying Fernando Alonso’s telemetry, something that bothered him a lot when Rosberg did the same. When partnered with Button, he made some mistakes with regard to the set up of the car. Monza 2010 ans Spa 2012 springs to my mind. You never see Fernando Alonso putting the wrong wing on his car BTW. In a no way Hamilton is a more complete driver than Schumacher, he’s way behind him in the technical department and this is only one aspect.

      1. But does it seem at any point, that Hamilton has poor car setup today?

        Whatever the regulations, Hamilton won in each season he competed in. And most seasons he competed for the title.

        :D Now personally I like Schumacher more, but there is no denying Hamilton is superior in many ways, has his own style of racing, that is cleaner, nicer, etc. And still gets to win massive amount of races.

      2. Schumacher never got breathless on the radio and had Brawn calming him down like Bono does.

        Schumacher could make complex decisions and calculations while driving on the limit. This in an era where you had to drive on the limit for 100% race distance unlike now where it’s conservation.

        Hamilton’s had an utterly dominant hybrid Mercedes since 2014 now. Almost half his career. When you have that kind of dominant car, you don’t have to push the limit, don’t have to take unnecessary risks. Even on a bad day, you can bring it home for a podium with no risk knowing it’ll be on your terms again the next race.

    13. For his 1st WDC, Hamilton also crashed to the back of Kimi in Canada ..but it was not dirty ..more like pure stupidity.
      But when he pushed Kimi off in Japan ..that was dirty.

      1. Nothing dirty at all, he didn’t even touch Kimi, it was actually Heikki that pushed Kimi off track. Dirty was Massa cutting the chicane to hit/spin Hamilton. Hamilton was given the same penalty, a drive thru for not contacting Kimi as Massa was for crashing into Hamilton.

    14. I think Schumacher was better than Hamilton. But more importantly I think Webber talks too much.

    15. I won’t delve into the ‘more complete driver’ debate as both drivers have had very complete teams within which to make themselves look complete, but I will say that without question LH has not nearly been the boorish bully on the track that MS felt the need to be in spite of his massive advantages hand over fist over the rest of the field.

    16. People seem to forget (including Deiter in his previous article) that Schumacher was the Benchmark driver for most of the 90’s as well as the 2000’s. He beat all comers and was THE championship contender consistently, every year from 94 until he left Ferrari at the end of 2006. His strive to gain every competitive advantage he could, also turned racing drivers into the professional athletes that they are today.

    17. Complete driver..

      I thought Schumacher is the definition of complete driver.

      Hamilton is far from complete, but he is faster. Because of extra speed, he can afford to race cleanly and very conservatively.

      Schumacher often had to resort to crazy actions when he was not faster. But that is what made him a complete opponent, because when it came to war, he was ready in all ways.

      Other than that, I agree with Webber 100%.

      1. Yes, indeed schumacher was one of the most complete drivers ever.

        However I have to admit hamilton improved a lot in recent years when it comes to consistency, especially 2018 and 2019 where in the worse races he’d have given up in the past, while he still tried to get the most out of the situation, even getting away with a 2nd place like monza 2019.

        I agree he still didn’t really prove his ability in a bad car, 2009 mclaren was only bad for a part of the year, he had this luck to join in an already championship capable car, while drivers like schumacher, senna or many others really, had to prove they were good enough in a midfield car before getting a good drive.

    18. MW – is nobody to say anything like this, period.

    19. He is luckier than Schumacher for sure :)

    20. He’s right

    Comments are closed.