Monaco Gp is schumacher gonna win?

Yea mclaren couldnt win so they had the pace car take out shumi!! LOL.

I'm not Trulli, I don't have to be politically correct.

OK, I have given you an account of an F1 driver who was right behind the drivers involved in the accident and who literaly says that Montoya was allowing "no space between himself and the Ferrari". Then I give you a very simple logical and common sense conclusion that the driver behind knows, is 100 % certain, that there is a period of hard braking to follow yet, as the driver behind them literaly says "leaves no room for the Ferrari". An added bonus is that Trulli also says that several corners before the two almost had an accident in the same situation, yet the second driver still chooses to "leave no space between himself and the Ferrari" even though he knows that there is a moment of hard braking to follow. Added to that is the fact that there was no reason whatsoever to follow the leader closely through Mirabeau because there is still more than a third of a lap to go before the pace car goes into the pits. And yet added to that is the fact that the driver behind is one lap down on the leader anyway. yet you ind some way not to see all that, there isn't much I can say, other than remind you of that veil I mentioned.

I'm not Trulli, I don't have to be politically correct.

OK, I have given you an account of an F1 driver who was right behind the drivers involved in the accident and who literaly says that Montoya was allowing "no space between himself and the Ferrari".

But that same driver refused to assign blame Alex, was he being PC in saying so? I don't know, he may have been PC or looking for a Ferrari drive in saying what he did :dunno: His evidence is not conclusive, it can be use to support either argument as we have proven, why won't you acknoledge everything he said, rather than just half of it? [/QUOTE]

Then I give you a very simple logical and common sense conclusion that the driver behind knows, is 100 % certain, that there is a period of hard braking to follow yet,

This I continute to completely and utterly refute. Montoya could not have known exactly what Schumacher was going to do. If you say he did (which is nonsence) then you must believe Montoya played out the entire incident deliberately since he knows all things. Can you not understand the logical extension of such a flawed supposition?

as the driver behind them literaly says "leaves no room for the Ferrari". An added bonus is that Trulli also says that several corners before the two almost had an accident in the same situation, yet the second driver still chooses to "leave no space between himself and the Ferrari"

Trulli's evidence leads me to believe both Schumacher and Montoya were probably playing games with each other as is part of their stock in trade. Schumaher simply screwed up first on this occasion. If he had not wrong footed himself then Montoya would not have had to take evasive action.

even though he knows that there is a moment of hard braking to follow.

I believe I've heard this song before. I am impressed how clearly you can not only read Montoya's mind but also how clearly he can read Schumacher's. Wonder why he hasn't put the talent to better use in the past. What is Juan having for breakfast tomorrow?

Added to that is the fact that there was no reason whatsoever to follow the leader closely through Mirabeau because there is still more than a third of a lap to go before the pace car goes into the pits.

Thats right becuse there is no reason why anybody should attempt to cahllenge the Myth of Schumi. He is born to lead, others to trail in his wake. First his teammate isn't allowed to race him now nobody else is either?

And yet added to that is the fact that the driver behind is one lap down on the leader anyway.

Yes he had lost almost a whole lap because of the safety car. Any racer would try and take every opportunity to recoup some of that loss. Otherwise why is he being paid a fortune? Race was ON not over. Schumacher in his enormous capacity of talent for driving and racing strategy could have taken that into account. Instead he cooked it.

yet you ind some way not to see all that, there isn't much I can say, other than remind you of that veil I mentioned.

I see all of it Alex and much deeper besides. Your full blown body suit of antaginism for Montoya is colouring your view.

Yes, I have developed an antagonism of Montoya because I hate whigning and hypocricy, and he has become to represent both.

I don't think Montoya did that deliberately, but he certainly did not use his head or try his best to prevent the accident.

If you refute that it's common knowledge to everyone, and especially F1 drivers, that after a driver during a safety car period accelerates he brakes hard very soon after that then I don't have much to say, in that case the first half of your last point is pure and simple wishful thinking. If Montoya didn't know with a 100 % certainty that after doing a burnout Schumi will be braking hard, then he is a worse driver than I think he is.

The race was not on for Montoya, but even if we ignore for a moment the fact that he was lapped, the race was certainly not on for him or anybody at Mirabeau or in the tunnel.

As for your take on Trulli's comments, well, I guess you either believe them or don't. I see no reason not to. If he said that to get a Ferrari seat the comments would have been much more blame-appointing. And I guess DC is also trying to get a Ferrari seat.

"Left no space between himself and the Ferrari"

Yes, I have developed an antagonism of Montoya because I hate whigning and hypocricy, and he has become to represent both.

So we must agree whe can't stand Schumacher since he was far worse.

I don't think Montoya did that deliberately, but he certainly did not use his head or try his best to prevent the accident.

Ah, I think we are starting to make some common ground here, of course Montoya could have behaved more circumspectly and avioded the accident. Exactly the same can be said for Schumacher. Thing is, neither of them are paid for playing it safe.

If you refute that it's common knowledge to everyone, and especially F1 drivers, that after a driver during a safety car period accelerates he brakes hard very soon after that then I don't have much to say, in that case the first half of your last point is pure and simple wishful thinking. If Montoya didn't know with a 100 % certainty that after doing a burnout Schumi will be braking hard, then he is a worse driver than I think he is.

Can you not see that what Schumacher did was not "normal"? If it was Montoya could have been reasonbale expected to anticipate it and aviod an accident. Schumacher goofed. It's okay people make mistakes, most racing drivers don't admit them though.

The race was not on for Montoya, but even if we ignore for a moment the fact that he was lapped, the race was certainly not on for him or anybody at Mirabeau or in the tunnel.

The race was always on. Even behind the safety car, even lapped these guys don't give up and have to be 100% looking for an advantage. Schumacher is known to be weak under pressure. Perhaps Montoya has just proved that again?

As for your take on Trulli's comments, well, I guess you either believe them or don't. I see no reason not to. If he said that to get a Ferrari seat the comments would have been much more blame-appointing. And I guess DC is also trying to get a Ferrari seat.

"Left no space between himself and the Ferrari"

Oh I believe Trulli, I see nor reason not to. Thing is if you choose to beileve his quote you have to believe all of it, not just the bits you want to.

Oh, I believe it's hard (for him) to assign blame (for whatever reason, it's his prerogative).

We must be talking about a different Schumacher; while the one I meant is known for being hard and even intentionally trying to ram another driver off the track, I certainly don't remember him whigning or being hypocritical, and certainly not "much worse" than Montoya during the last couple of seasons.

If anything, it demontstrated, for yet anotherm time, Montoya's inability to use his head even at the expense of another drivers, as well as his overwhelming, even obsessive, desire to beat Schmacher at all cost.

Think is, Schumacher was entitled to his mistake (even though he says there wasn't one, and without telemetry I cannot say otherwise, but what do his words mean to you, of course you know better). Montoya, however, wasn't entitled to follow him so close as not to be able to collide with him, especially since he knew that Schumi was going to brake and brake hard. This is plain ridiculous - I see the guy in front do a burnout, I know he is going to brake hard and I will still follow him so close so that it leaves me no time to react to his braking ... even though I know for sure that he will be braking ... doesn't add up. Intentional - no, not really, don't think so, but getting so immersed in trying to psyche out Schumacher and not usin your brain (see the sentence with a lot of commas above) is plain stupid and irresponsible.

Oh, I believe it's hard (for him) to assign blame (for whatever reason, it's his prerogative).

Yes but since he doesn't assign blame how can you based on his quote?

We must be talking about a different Schumacher; while the one I meant is known for being hard and even intentionally trying to ram another driver off the track, I certainly don't remember him whigning or being hypocritical, and certainly not "much worse" than Montoya during the last couple of seasons.

I'm talking about the Schumacher of the early days. The petulant git who would ignore the black flag and then complain he was banned for two races. The last few seasons his been unchallenged on the track so his overiding image is one of smugness

If anything, it demontstrated, for yet anotherm time, Montoya's inability to use his head even at the expense of another drivers, as well as his overwhelming, even obsessive, desire to beat Schmacher at all cost.

And Schumachers inability to use the brake peddle...

Think is, Schumacher was entitled to his mistake (even though he says there wasn't one, and without telemetry I cannot say otherwise, but what do his words mean to you, of course you know better).

Schumacher was entitled to his mistake and also entitled to accept the consequences.

Montoya, however, wasn't entitled to follow him so close as not to be able to collide with him, especially since he knew that Schumi was going to brake and brake hard.

I'm sure you believe that Alex, you also seem to believe it is against the laws of the universe for anybody else to challenge Schumacher.

This is plain ridiculous - I see the guy in front do a burnout, I know he is going to brake hard and I will still follow him so close so that it leaves me no time to react to his braking ... even though I know for sure that he will be braking ... doesn't add up. Intentional - no, not really, don't think so, but getting so immersed in trying to psyche out Schumacher and not usin your brain (see the sentence with a lot of commas above) is plain stupid and irresponsible.

Come up with something new, we're going around in circles here. I can't argue with you while you continue rely on psychic ability rather than logic and observation. You know, whatever the cause and outcome the guy who is one up here is Montoya - in the story as you tell it Schumacher cracked yet again.

I'm still waiting for the challenge to begin - it certainly isn't coming frm Montoya, not in the Monaco race (when he was a lap down), nor in general (Schumacher has won almost twice as many races this year than Montoya in his F1 careera).

Schumacher paid for his mistake, and I'm not talking about the debatabe braking mistake (he says there wasn't one, as he might as he was the one driving, you say there was as you hate him so much you don't see the facts quite clearly), but rather the one I mentioned before - relying on Montoya to use his head.

I cannot come up with anything new, nor do I see any need to. I cannot help it if you, clouded by bitterness, cannot see the simple fact that Montoya's actions just do not add up to something that a person using the brain in a proper manner would do in such situation.

In all this argueing, I have only heard mention that if Montoya did manage to pass MS on the restart, he would no sooner be past then MS would be passing him again as soon as MS's tyres were up to temp.
I haven't heard anyone mention JPM's strange ability to go fastest on cold tyres (something he has proven time and again, from Indy through F1).
Taking that into account, is it feasible to believe that JPM was conspiring to get the pass in on cold tyres and get a few quicker laps on MS to maybe not only try to unlap himself, but actually close the gap on some of the runners ahead of him?

That is all, flame away. :disappoin

Montoya is indeed renowned for being great on cold tyres, he was amazing in CART, and Michelin due to the way they're built get up to temperatures much sooner, that said, I don't see it working in this particular case since: F2004 is a much better car, Montoya was running much more fuel than Schumi as he had just been into the pits, his nearest rival was rubens and he was almost a lap ahead, and (:D) Schumi is not exactly the opposition that Montoya encountered in CART.

Well, that was predictable......

So you disagree with my assesment? Which part(s) of it?

I disagree with the fact that you can't even give another driver credit for a moment.
You have to look at things in the full scope of things.

In all seriousness, it's no secret I'm not an MS fan, but I will admit that when the heavens open, he is the best on the track, it's called giving credit where credit is due.

Huh??? I thought I have quite a bit of credit, even said he was amazing on cold tyres??? I just voiced my opinion why the plan you described would not have worked in the given circumstances.

is it feasible to believe that JPM was conspiring to get the pass in on cold tyres and get a few quicker laps on MS to maybe not only try to unlap himself, but actually close the gap on some of the runners ahead of him?

Disclaimer: Believe it or not, im not saying what im about to say because Herr Schumacher was out in front. If whoever reads it chooses to interpret it as "no one should be allowed to race schumi", dont bother replying.

Anyway. Ray, if that is indeed what Juan Pablo was trying to do, isnt it cheeky (to say the least) and highly risky to attempt to pass the race leader under such circumstances (not for position, but to unlap yourself) in a race such as Monaco where overtaking is nigh on impossible?

Yes it is cheeky, but we already know that JPM is a risk taker.

Ok. Forget this particular incident for a minute. Are you happy seeing fast guys in lapped cars try to unlap themselves in similar circumstances (SC) in the future?

In all honesty Jay, if a driver can unlap himself fairly and without taking unecessary risk, I see no problem with it.

Hypothetical situation:
Rubens loses front and rear wing on opening lap and cuts down a tire.
He limps into the pits to get new wings and a tire change, in the meantime several slower cars lap him, he then exits the pits and begins to unlap himself throughout the course of the race.

Do you see a problem with that?
Or should he stay a lap down because, according to some people's theory, he's a lap down and no longer in the race?

Obviously JPM took a risk and it cost both him and MS finishing the race, but that was Sunday and is in the past, what is all the bickering going to change?

EDIT: Spelling :rolleyes:

In all honesty Jay, if a driver can unlap himself fairly and without taking unecessary risk, I see no problem with it.

Hypothetical situation:
Rubens...
That's cool, I'm with you on your first statement & the hypothetical scenario. I just think pulling that kind of stunt on a SC scenario and at a 'race track' like Monaco is somewhat reckless.


what is all the bickering going to change?
The bickering doesnt change anything, but where would the fun be if everyone agreed on everything? :)

This is like an aim convo through posts lol!

Stuff this trivial banter (I claim victory for the forces of good and fairness). There are important moves afoot in the WRC, to the Rally Forum!

You can claim the win for the blided haters for whom every incident involving Schumacher is automatically, whatever the evidence or testimonials, his fault. Congratulations, you earned it.

Well I'd have to say I Honestly as a ferrari fan dont think schumi would have cam back and won the race just for the fact that its MONACO the most intense race of the seoson in my prespective. Ultrafast turns 1 inch away from the wall and the whole world watching u.

You can claim the win for the blided haters for whom every incident involving Schumacher is automatically, whatever the evidence or testimonials, his fault. Congratulations, you earned it.

Err, why would I do that? All I have ever done in this thread is try and counter your assumption that Montoya was automatically in the wrong. Are you saying I blame Schumacher? If so you are furthering your habit of being wrong. On the other hand if all you are after is the last word then go ahead...

Thanks. Just so you know, my first reaction was that Schumacher had a problem either in his head or with his car, then I actually looked at the facts and formed a diffeernt opinion.

JPM is full of shit and a hypocrite

LOL :D Yeah, well....

I quite liked his appearance at the press conference on Thursday, he said pretty much the right things and seemed genuinely upset by what happened. Sounded sincere, so kudos for that.