Schumacher voted Belgian GP Driver of the Weekend

2011 Belgian Grand Prix

Michael Schumacher, Mercedes, Spa-Francorchamps, 2011

Schumacher climbed 19 places to finish fifth

Michael Schumacher became the seventh different driver to be voted Driver of the Weekend this year.

Championship leader and seven-times race winner Sebastian Vettel is still not among them.

Schumacher had a substantial margin over closest contenders Jenson Button and Vettel in the voting:

Driver of the Belgian Grand Prix Weekend poll ?ǣ top three

1. Michael Schumacher ?ǣ 45.1%
2. Jenson Button ?ǣ 28.2%
3. Sebastian Vettel ?ǣ 14.7%

The results may suggest that the choice was easy, but the comments show many of the F1 Fanatic readers struggled to choose one driver only:

It’s just so tough again to vote on this. We had Bruno Senna and Jaime Alguersuari doing a superb job in qualifying, but Senna had his (forgiveable, but still) mistake at the start and just a solid drive to bring it home after that. And Alguersuari never got a chance even at that much.

Mark Webber made a sure candidate for the pass of the year, but he just cannot seem to get the Red Bull off the line. Lewis Hamilton started off well, with some nice moves and keeping out of trouble, only for it to end in a collision that needn?t have happened.

Schumacher was really great, lets hope we see him and Mercedes like this more often now (didn?t we say that earlier in his second career as well?). Surely a serious contender for driver of the weekend.

Nico Rosberg made a great start, but got caught by the horribly chosen DRS zone placement. He did his best, but not superb.

Button has a stellar drive, comparable with Canada but this time in the dry and not making a single mistake on his part. And some of his passes were really excellent and gutsy. This is the Button we want to see each weekend. Even the qualifying thing was not really his mistake, so he is a serious contender.

Vettel did a qualifying stunt once again, he was not perfect off the line, but he did get Rosberg with fine employment of DRS as soon as it was there.

He had the safety car exactly come to him and solve his pit stop dilemma for him, and then he made an excellent pass on Alonso before DRS got enabled again (passing Webber on the go somewhere). And he did pass Rosberg again after his first pit stop.
BasCB

Was torn between Button and Schumacher, But Jenson had it for me this weekend. I thought it was a great race with some brilliant performances from loads of drivers. Viva F1!
Trenthamfolk

Michael Schumacher

Schumacher’s 20th anniversary race weekend did not start well as he lost his wheel in Q1 on Saturday and was forced to start the race from the back of the grid.

But he produced a great recovery drive to finish fifth ?ǣ one place ahead of his team mate.

His performance impressed F1 Fanatic readers so much that he gathered nearly half of the votes in the poll and over three times as many as Vettel. Here are some of your comments justifying the choice of Schumacher as the Driver of the Belgian Grand Prix Weekend:

Hard to do much better than start 24th and last and end up 5th and ahead of your team mate who started 5th.
snowman

Easily Schumacher. Did not put a foot wrong all weekend, whereas Vettel has struggled until Q2 as he admitted, and Button managed not to see the green lights in a critical moment which could well cost him a victory. [...]

It was Schumacher who ran the show on Sunday, I think. Impeccable drive.
Atticus

Jenson Button

Jenson Button, McLaren, Spa-Francorchamps, 2011

Button recovered from an early setback to claim a podium

Button was another driver who was forced to fight his way through the field on Sunday. After a tactical error in qualifying, he started the race 13th, but despite some damage to his car, he managed to secure a podium finish.

Many F1 Fanatic readers found his performance impressive:

I voted for Button as the qualifying error was purely down to bad communication. He had shown some good pace in qualifying before that.

His race was fantastic to follow and he really showed his overtaking skills with many gutsy moves. I was really impressed with the way he attacked the race, it was more like a Hamilton drive rather than Button.
smifaye

Both Schumacher and Button deserve but I voted the later as he showed that he can be a aggressive driver when required and unlike his team mate he is calm and cool.
wasiF1

Sebastian Vettel

Sebastian Vettel, Red Bull, Spa-Francorchamps, 2011

Vettel kept on top of tyre trouble to score his seventh win of 2011

The winner of the Belgian Grand Prix took third place in the poll for the Driver of the Weekend.

Vettel clinched yet another pole position on Saturday. Despite blistering tyres he delivered a flawless performance on Sunday with some great passes to win the Belgian Grand Prix for the first time in his career.

The Red Bull pilot won over many fans with his drive:

I never voted for Vettel before but this weekend he showed all his abilities as well as being as clinical as ever. He definitely gets my vote. [...]

Vettel was forced to perform some magic this weekend under huge pressure and he made it look easy.
MW

I too was torn between Button and Schumacher, so I voted for… Vettel. This didn?t seem like a race that was handed to him by any means, he had to defend a bit, he had to pass (more than he usually does).
socalf1fan

I?m also going to be unpopular and say Vettel. He deserves a DOTW but unfortunately a drive through the field is seen as a much better drive than winning from pole.

Still, he didn?t have it easy. He ended up making 3 passes for the lead, one of which wasn?t DRS on Alonso who had better straight line speed. His move on Rosberg was also brilliant.
TommyB89

I?m saying Vettel too. Everyone else had something go wrong at some point, whether it was their fault or someone else?s.

Vettel didn?t, and managed this odd blistering situation fairly well, winning having scored pole. Plus he did some overtaking.
ajokay

2011 Driver of the Weekend results so far

First Second Third
Australia Sergio Perez (36.3%) Vitaly Petrov (32.5%) Sebastian Vettel (12.0%)
Malaysia Nick Heidfeld (38.4%) Sebastian Vettel (16.0%) Jenson Button (12.1%)
China Mark Webber (47.8%) Lewis Hamilton (42.4%) Felipe Massa (2.5%)
Turkey Fernando Alonso (37.8%) Kamui Kobayashi (25.8%) Sebastian Vettel (22.1%)
Spain Lewis Hamilton (39.6%) Sebastian Vettel (23.9%) Fernando Alonso (13.3%)
Monaco Jenson Button (33.1%) Fernando Alonso (18.8%) Sebastian Vettel (17.0%)
Canada Jenson Button (61.0%) Michael Schumacher (27.8%) Sebastian Vettel (2.2%)
Europe Fernando Alonso (32.6%) Sebastian Vettel (27.6%) Jaime Alguersuari (25.7%)
Britain Fernando Alonso (53.0%) Lewis Hamilton (22.3%) Mark Webber (8.0%)
Germany Lewis Hamilton (76.6%) Adrian Sutil (9.8%) Fernando Alonso (5.6%)
Hungary Jenson Button (50.7%) Paul di Resta (14.4%) Lewis Hamilton (11.8%)
Belgium Michael Schumacher (45.1%) Jenson Button (28.2%) Sebastian Vettel (14.7%)

It was Schumacher’s first win in the Driver of the Weekend poll.

The result also mean that the championship dominant leader, Sebastian Vettel, is still yet to win driver of the weekend. However he has appeared in the top three eight times, more than any other driver.

Do you agree with the results so far? Have your say in the comments section below.

2011 Belgian Grand Prix

Browse all 2011 Belgian Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Mercedes

Advert | Go Ad-free

73 comments on Schumacher voted Belgian GP Driver of the Weekend

  1. BavarianMaleWorker said on 7th September 2011, 11:15

    Earlier in his career, I think he could have gotten on the podium, but still was a great drive… Even if Nico let him through for 5th ;)

    • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 11:43

      In that car, podium in front of Button and Alonso? Don’t think so.

      And he was more than 1sec/lap faster than Rosberg before that stupid and unnecessary call from the pits so the pass would’ve happened anyway.

      • Schumi is the greatest F1 team builder of all,and IMO the greatest driver of all time.He will stay with Merc GP until they are winning,he will never give up.
        However I predict his last year in F1 will be back with Ferrari driving alongside Alonso.

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 7th September 2011, 14:21

          If you’d told me in 2006 that Schumacher would return to F1 in 2010 with a new factory Mercedes team I’d’ve laughed at you. So I’d be foolish to write this off.

          Still can’t see it happening, though.

          • I have to agree with Keith here. There is no doubt Schumacher still feels part of Ferrari’s history, but I simply can’t see him going anywhere after Mercedes, especially not into the same team as Alonso. It just simply isn’t in his character.

            But, as Keith said, who knows?!

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 7th September 2011, 14:29

            Ever feel like you’ve just written a comment that one day is going to come back and bite you on the backside?

          • Would be nice though. Would be nice of Michael too choose to partner Alonso as well.

        • Robbie said on 7th September 2011, 16:08

          Duke…he has already gotten embarrassed by being bested for more than a season and a half by NR who has never won a race, because he simply no longer has the perfect storm of ingredients from several fronts that helped him compile the numbers he has in the past, including non-competing teammates.

          In the limited time he has left in F1, if he can help Merc until they are winning it seems it might just as easily be NR that will be doing the winning as MS unless they too are going to start building MS a designer car and insist NR be a support driver from race 1.

          As to moving back to Ferrari…he would never go to a team with such a strong teammate…he (and many others) no doubt didn’t expect NR to be so good against him, and even if Ferrari would have him he would never go up against a 2 time WDC. Up until Merc last year that was one of MS’s secrets to ‘success’…a non-competing teammate…the opposite of what FA is…and what NR has proven to be.

          • I’m a bit sick of this rubbish about NR pasting MS – as if there’s some enormous gulf in class and results. There isn’t. NR is generally better in qualifying; but MS’s race pace is often comparable if not better, and he’s had more DNFs (either due to mechanical problems or over-aggressive driving). It’s not like Alonso and Massa.

            I think MS came back mainly because he found he still needed the buzz and the challenge. And because he enjoys the process of helping a high-mid table team rediscover its greatness (like at Ferrari). I wouldn’t be surprised to see him stick around for a while, as he’s there for the long term challenge, not some quick and deluded tour of glory, despite what his detractors think.

            But as for him and Alonso on the same team. I can’t see this. The two modern drivers least likely – some would say psychologically able – to have competitive team-mates, in the same team? Er, no. That’d end in tears.

          • Robbie said on 7th September 2011, 17:43

            Hey Jim…respectfully, I got sick of a decade of enormous gulf in class and results at Ferrari when MS was coddled with non-competing teammates during his tenure there. Any small amount that NR is ahead of MS after more than a season and a half is a total turnaround from the way MS has had it in the past, and I’m sure is enormous for NR.

            I think it sounds all well and good for either he or you to say that he just came back for the buzz and the challenge, but let’s face it, he didn’t come back to lose…he came back because he thought he could win or he wouldn’t have come back at all. Brawn had him as 2010 WDC.

            For all the plentiful MS fans there are on this site and everywhere, with all the positive things they have to say about the man as a standing 7 time WDC, some opining he is the best ever, I sure think based on that what NR has done so far is quite understated. He led the last race at the start, starting from 5th, and without DRS might have held that position for a number of laps. And yet got 8 votes for DotW. Oh well, shouldn’t be surprised since SV hasn’t won DoW either.

          • Actually, Robbie, I’m not really a Schumacher fan – as my last paragraph reveals. Heck, the guy nearly ruined the sport for me 10 years ago with his relentless predictability.

            It’s just that all this claptrap about how he’s supposedly being spanked by NR bugs me because it isn’t really accurate. Thye are performing very comparably in identical cars – which is probably what you’d expect from two good drivers.

            Yes, MS benefitted from supine teammates in years past. But to argue that his WDCs were undeserved, or that he’s ‘really’ only an average driver is just a bit silly and desperate.

          • Robbie said on 9th September 2011, 15:48

            Fair enough, Jim…I just think that compared to how badly MS spanked his teammates, but in my view in a large part because he had massive advantages that go beyond talent over his teammates as well as the rest of the field, NR is actually doing extremely well even if that means he is ahead of him by even a small margin…and he is way way ahead in quali…I realize that in raw numbers NR isn’t doing that much better, the car just isn’t a winner, but relative to how MS has had it, what NR is doing imho is the equivalent of monumental.

            I’ve never argued that MS is only an average driver, but I have argued all the advantages he has had that imho are hand over fist greater than any other driver in the history of F1, so that asterisk needs not be forgotten. And I do say that the 94 WDC was undeserved…proven illegalities and the whack on DH and the kangaroo court that took place within the FIA afterwards that saw MS able to keep that WDC is what I cite when I say that. The other WDC’s took place in an atmosphere of heavy skewing toward MS including by the FIA themselves that were eager to see the Ferrari WDC drought ended and in that regard were undeserved, again, imho…or if fans want to consider them deserved they should at least acknowledge all the effort that went into MS’s wins…the extra money Ferrari got, the extra voting power regarding rule changes, the turning a blind eye to his unethical behaviour, the permanent team orders that robbed the fans of true racing at Ferrari for a decade…

          • @Robbie Johny Herbert in his inteview recently said that it’s not Schumacher to Blame but Briatore. Anyway in term of completeness for sure Micahel is better than Herbert, this video shows it:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk2p2nRK-p4
            At Merc Michael isn’t at his prime and he is in his 40s but he shows he is still fast enough, his problem at the moment is in qualy but race he got even or better than Nico, Norbert also stated that.

            1994 Benetton case was a controversy, FIA did investigate it but couldn’t prove the allegation btw Mclaren team also been investigated.
            “whacking DH” Murray Walker surely doesn’t agree with you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaKYTNU3U0A&feature=share it’s all down to own perspective i tend to follow Murray Walker on this one. The Ferrari extra vote which they never used it. He got punished in 1997 and in Monaco 2006, 2005 they changed the regulation to stop his domination which contrary to your accusation that FIA turn a blind eye. Team order wasn’t illegal in 2002 most teams before it deemed illegal used it as well.

            In your view all Michael achievements was down to all the advantages he has base on your obsessive hate and 99% just pointed out his controversies or mistakes and sometimes exaggerated it without seeing his other great stuff that’s more or less make your comments less credible.

  2. Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th September 2011, 11:16

    I never thought I’d see the day where I disagreed with Schumacher being voted Driver of the Weekend!

    When I’m asked why I think Schumacher was better than Senna, part of the answer I give is that the things Senna could have done had he not died, Schumacher did. We don’t have proof Senna would have but we know Schumacher did. I don’t like to bring in ifs and buts if I can help it and I feel this happened with this poll.

    If Schumacher’s wheel hadn’t fallen off, if Button hadn’t slowed down in Q2…well, Vettel had his wheels stay on and he didn’t fall out in Q2, he got pole, passed people and won the race. Schumacher and Button both ultimately benefited from their qualifying woes (starting on the prime tyre), especially with the Safety Car coming out. He was slightly lucky Ferrari boobed on the SC strategy, but that’s it.

    • I admire both Senna and Schumacher, but I think a significant difference is that when Senna was winning he was always looking for a team producing a faster car, which is why he moved to Williams for 1994. Schumacher, on the other hand, went to Ferrari in 1996 to build a team from scratch, rather than staying at Benetton or moving to Williams.

      • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 11:49

        Or maybe Schumacher went to Ferrari for that nice 25m$/year salary he wouldn’t get anywhere else? Also, it’s not like he came into an HRT. Ferrari were 3rd in the Constructors in 1995 and with vast resources and great facilities.

        Schumacher is a great driver, no need to make some kind of martyr out of him. He didn’t make any sacrifices coming to Ferrari.

        • David-A (@david-a) said on 7th September 2011, 15:02

          Vast resources that obviously weren’t being utilised very well. The performance of the car was inferior to that of the ’95 frontrunners.

        • Yes and no; while Ferrari certainly has ample resources, good drivers have either wasted their time (Alain Prost) or squandered their career (Jean Alesi) by moving there instead of to, say, Williams (Prost did eventually move to Williams after his 1-year sabbatical from Ferrari).

          Moving to Ferrari anytime from 1980 to the mid-90s is actually rather risky.

      • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 7th September 2011, 11:58

        I appreciate what you’re saying, and I do agree to an extent; I just think it’s stretching things a bit far to claim he started a team from scratch when Ferrari are the oldest, richest and most established team in F1.

        I think a more accurate description would be that he joined one the greatest teams in the history of motorsport at a time when they were struggling to stay in the midfield and hadn’t won anything in years and helped them return to their rightful position as the team to beat and World Champions.

    • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 11:52

      Strongly disagree. Senna had done all Schumacher did and more. Unless you’re looking squarely at the stats page, which is a wrong way of comparing drivers IMO.

      • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th September 2011, 12:16

        Senna had done all Schumacher did and more

        Help a team that was in the doldrums become world champions (instead of jumping from a team in the doldrums to the world champions)? Put in endless miles of testing to develop the car to the best it could be (instead of going home to sun it on the beaches for months, leaving it all to his team-mate)? Win championships with more than one team? Or is the last one too much of a stat?

        • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 13:02

          Again this myth. Ferrari started an upward curve in 1993 already with the arrival of Todt. And it took 5 seasons for Schumacher to win the WDC and without Brawn, Byrne and Todt he would never have done it. A team is precisely that-a team. Had Dennis managed to nick Newey from Williams the same way he managed to steal their Honda engines in 1987, do you think Senna would’ve left? A driver always seeks a competitive car. Schumacher also wanted to go to Williams, and held preliminary talks with them, however Williams wouldn’t guarantee him a No1 status and certainly wouldn’t pay him the kind of salary he wanted. So don’t make a saint out of him please.

          Senna not developing the car leaving it all to Prost is another myth of Senna haters.

          Schumacher had with him the same key people in Ferrari as he had in Benetton with the addition of Todt who was a better team principal than Briatore could ever be. Team’s identity doesn’t matter as much as the members of the team do. So winning for more than one team doesn’t automatically make you greater.G. Hill had won his two titles for two different teams as well, while Clark won both his titles for one team. But no one in his right mind would suggest that G. Hill was better than Clark. Prost also won with two teams. And if he wasn’t in williams in 1993 then Mansell would’ve won. And if not them, then Hill would’ve done so. So is Prost also a hero having won for 2 teams?(I’m aware that he won in 1986 against the better Williams’, and that indeed makes him a hero in my eyes, but it’s not the point you were making).

          And by the way, you make the point of moving to a better team against Senna, but didn’t Prost call Ferrari a “red truck” in 1991 instead of being constructive and help it improve the car and was subsequently fired? That same Ferrari that Schumacher “saved” in your opinion? So maybe you’re talking here out of your bias against Senna, is that possible?

          • Think about this: who convinced Brawn and Byrne to move to Ferrari? Schumacher. Why would these two great men put their careers on the line to follow a driver (even if it’s to Ferrari)? Not even Senna managed that. Also, Ferrari won 2 GPs from 1993-1995. Schumacher won 3 GPs in 1996 alone – and that was before Brawn and Byrne arrived. That says a lot, no?

            Winning titles with more than one team doesn’t make you great by itself, but it adds to the case.

            Re: Prost, I’m not sure what that has to do with this discussion. Surely it just means that both Prost AND Senna aren’t as good as Schumacher?

          • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 16:31

            Re: Brawn and Byrne, I reckon they went with Schumacher because they have just already won two consecutive titles with him and believed in him. Fair enough? Senna was never in the same situation so your comparison here is not valid.

            I’ve mentioned an upward CURVE. Ferrari was more competitive in 1993 than in 1992 and the same is right for 1994>93 and 1995>94. Ferrari even scored more points in 1995 than in 1996. And when you’re dealing with such unreliable cars as the Ferraris of 1994-96 the final number of wins can vary purely because of luck. 1995 Ferrari could’ve won at least 4 races had it been slightly more reliable and in 1994 at least 3. In 1996 the engine expired on Michael’s car on the formation lap in France. What would be his win score if that had happened in Spa instead? We can’t know of course but my point is, when you have an unreliable car that’s occasionally fast, you can be hero or zero in a matter of seconds.But you can’t miss the upward trend that started in 1993 already.

            If you’re a multiple WDC, you’re already great no matter with how many teams and the only driver in the history of F1 for whom changing teams and winning another title indeed made a difference(read: made him greater than he already was) was Sir Jack Brabham, who won his third title with his own team.

            I have great respect for Schumacher and his achievements and in no way I’m about to belittle him. He’s one of the greatest ever, even if he’s no Messiah as some portray him, and he’s definetely not a saint.

            Prost initially had nothing to do with the subject. However this was a reply to Ichtyes who deems it necessary to bring up Senna every second day(figuratively speaking of course :) ) even on unrelated subjects such as this one, in order to bash him and compare him unfavorably with his beloved Prost and Schumacher. So, if that’s the way the wind blows I felt entitled to bring up Prost here to emphasize my point further. :)

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 8th September 2011, 0:40

            Ferrari even scored more points in 1995 than in 1996.

            Because there was an extra race in 1995. Ferrari scored more points per race in 1996.

        • Rubens Barrichello gave a quote which features in James Allen’s Schumacher book. It goes along the lines of.

          Ayrton would get back to the pits after a lap and say “I know I can find three tenths within myself” whereas Michael would return and say “I know I can find three tenths within myself”

          This perfectly illustrates the difference between the Brazilian flair and passion and the German steely methodical approach.

          • For goodness sake! The end of the Michael quote is supposed to say “within the car”.

            Ruined that last post, sorry!

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 8th September 2011, 8:13

            To be honest Ben, at first I read exactly what it was meant to be, then realised it was different! That got me confused before reading your last post :-)

        • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th September 2011, 15:32

          Ferrari started an upward curve in 1993 already with the arrival of Todt.

          In the three years after Todt joined (but before Schumacher did) they took two wins and went from 4th to 3rd in the WCC. Improvement, but hardly comparing to the next step they took.

          And it took 5 seasons for Schumacher to win the WDC

          These things don’t happen overnight you know. McLaren went from 1991 to 1998 to win anything (and then again from 1999 to 2008), Williams haven’t won since 1997 or even competed since 2003.

          And yet in one season they had a car that won 3 races (more than the three years before combined), in two a car that could mount an outside campaign and in three one that could fight for the WDC on its own terms (Byrne’s first Ferrari, by the way). Don’t forget Schumacher’s broken leg in 1999 too, I’d love to see anyone win after that. Maybe he wouldn’t have anyway, but he didn’t have a crack at it, so it was more like 4 not 5 years and it would have been a miracle if they’d won it in 2 considering where they started from and what they were up against.

          Without Brawn, Byrne and Todt he would never have done it.

          Without Ron Dennis, Gordon Murray and even Alain Prost (who asked for him to be signed for 1988 over Nelson Piquet), not to mention Honda, Senna wouldn’t have won his titles either. So where’s the difference?

          A driver always seeks a competitive car.

          Which is why Schumacher went to Ferrari? Oh sure he got a big raise too, but Schumacher is hardly someone you could ever accuse of caring more about money than winning, after all the dodgy things he did. Most drivers will go for a top car, there’s no shame in that. Fangio did it constantly. The fact that Schumacher went to a lesser team just puts him up a bit compared to others who didn’t. Yeh, he needed a sweetener, but he knew from Day 1 it was a long-term project to the front, not an easy pay cheque. Besides, Senna himself wrangled with Dennis over his pay, to the point where in one meeting it even came to a coin toss!

          So don’t make a saint out of him please.

          I never have, I’m just saying how he did one or two things Senna didn’t. If you want to think in such black and white terms then no wonder you’re getting upset.

          Senna not developing the car leaving it all to Prost is another myth of Senna haters.

          Um, it’s not a myth, it’s a documented fact. Senna himself tried to justify it by saying he needed the rest (like Prost didn’t?). Senna was never one to hide when people questioned his methods, he always had a reason; he openly admitted he wasn’t doing testing when at the same time his team-mate was. Ron Dennis would sometimes have to phone Prost to ask him to come in because Ayrton hadn’t showed up. Read Senna v Prost, it’s a brilliant account of their rivalry and completely fair to both drivers (I actually liked Senna less before I read it).

          Schumacher had with him the same key people in Ferrari as he had in Benetton …so winning for more than one team doesn’t automatically make you greater

          That is true, but they still had to do it. Starting from the top means nothing if you don’t follow it up. Then there’s all the different medium and lower level staff, facilities, resources, not to mention Luca hanging over them all, the pressure of turning around a famous name, etc.

          G. Hill had won his two titles for two different teams as well, while Clark won both his titles for one team. But no one in his right mind would suggest that G. Hill was better than Clark.

          Since when did I say it was a sufficient clause for being? Piquet won as many championships with two different teams and I’m not saying that has to make him better than Senna. Not to mention people rate Clark because he was killed before he could win anything else; Hill himself probably only won his second because Clark died that year.

          Prost also won with two teams. And if he wasn’t in Williams in 1993 then Mansell would’ve won.

          Debatable; Mansell running away from Prost robbed us of a very interesting 1993 season.

          So is Prost also a hero having won for 2 teams?

          That’s something that counts in his favour, although it was all ready for him to jump into so it’s not quite as impressive as it sounds. It was his 13th year in F1 so I don’t really blame him for not going to, say, Benetton (Ferrari wouldn’t want him, McLaren still had Senna) instead of Williams.

          And by the way, you make the point of moving to a better team against Senna, but didn’t Prost call Ferrari a “red truck” in 1991 instead of being constructive and help it improve the car and was subsequently fired? That same Ferrari that Schumacher “saved” in your opinion? So maybe you’re talking here out of your bias against Senna, is that possible?

          1) You could never accuse Prost of not trying to fix the car’s problems. He was one of the last great development drivers after all. Prost’s mistake was to admit publicly that the Ferrari was rubbish that year; Ferrari didn’t like that and fired him.

          2) Your line of reasoning doesn’t even make sense. Because Prost “didn’t want to” fix Ferrari…I hate Senna? What?

          3) Is it not then entirely possible that you yourself are talking out of your own bias? (That’s a rhetorical question by the way, it’s clear you’re too sensitive to any criticism of Senna.) So why is your argument any better, mine any worse?

      • Macca77 said on 7th September 2011, 19:39

        Thanks for the clarification, I wasn’t aware Senna had won 7WDCs. Oh yeah I’m looking squarely at the stats, not a fan of pull out the %s stats to make Senna look better than he already is, at least he didn’t have to see Schumi becoming the new leader in F1 and his stats getting ruined as he enters more races without winning one. It’s the same case with Hamilton fans that say that he is the best ’cause he has a lot of top % stats right now, ignoring that most of the WDCs but him started in the lower-tier teams, let’s wait when he looses his seat at McLaren and his career starts going downwards to see the real %s he can accomplish.

        • David-A (@david-a) said on 7th September 2011, 20:21

          Harsh stuff since I grudgingly think that Lew is good enough to improve his stats at some point, and won’t be dropped by Mclaren. On the flipside Hamilton is already trailing a driver percentage wise who raced for STR and BMW.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 7th September 2011, 21:48

      Exactly why I voted Vettel in the end as well.

      The thought of Senna doing just as bad as Piquet at the end of his career is just a dounting one.

  3. I mostly disagree with the drivers of the weekends who didn’t perform well in qualifying (i.e Mark Webber in China). Even though Vettel won from pole in some of the races, it is good to acknowledge drivers behind him (i.e. Heidfeld in Malaysia, Alonso in Turkey and Europe).

  4. Doance (@doance) said on 7th September 2011, 11:26

    I don’t think Schumacher was as good as the top 3. He was slower during the race (lap times) and he wouldn’t have finished on the podium no matter where he started.

  5. beneboy (@beneboy) said on 7th September 2011, 11:35

    I voted for Schumacher so I obviously agree with the result; for me it was a choice between Button and Schumacher as I thought they both suffered from problems that weren’t their fault during qualifying and ended up way down the grid as a result yet still managed to make it to 3rd and 5th respectively.

    Vettel almost destroyed his tyres in qualifying (which wasn’t necessarily his fault) and in my opinion was the main benefactor of the safety car incident in the race and was effectively handed the lead as a result. So even though he drove quite well and ended up winning the race he didn’t do anything that would make him stand out as driver of the weekend for me.

  6. vjanik said on 7th September 2011, 11:36

    i think Vettel will win the “driver of the season”

  7. someone just said it’s schumacher for him because he didn’t put a foot wrong…
    a lot of people didn’t put a foot wrong (alonso,rosberg…)
    and they both did some great stuff but their car and team weren’t on their level this weekend. they should have been among the best of this weekend

  8. There are too many drivers from the top teams in the top three places. The best performance in my opinion often come from the midfield.

  9. montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 11:57

    Despite having voted for Schumacher this race, the fact that Vettel hadn’t won the Driver of the Race even once this year is a travesty and IMO reflects badly on us F1fanatics, starting with myself, even though I voted him the driver of the race in 3 races this year…

  10. SimBri said on 7th September 2011, 12:21

    I think it’s understandable, it’s easier to feel excited during a race by someone coming through the field. If, say, Hamilton or Button started on pole and led every lap while Vettel came from 13th to 2nd but still didn’t get DOTW then it would be a travesty and show clear bias. In a way it’s a reflection of how good he’s been that he hasn’t had it yet. As someone commented above, I think Vettel’s a shoe-in for driver of the year.

  11. Its a shame really that Vettel’s victories are looked down upon just cos he is on pole almost all the time and in RB.
    Despite the fact that RB lacks Race Pace. He makes it work despite that flaw.
    The same people criticized him last year saying he did not convert poles but not understanding the actual reasons for them.
    Now that he converts them its attributed to being in a good car. How many races has MW won? oh but that isn’t MW’s fault.

    Some facts from the race. He did not use DRS to overtake Rosberg the first time. certainly not the 2nd time thru blanchimont. That makes 3 non-DRS overtakes.
    Which of Button’s moves were more brilliant than a drive outside Blanchimont?
    Only MW-Alonso(Eau Rouge) was better.

    If such criteria were applied to awarding Race points, we’d see drivers competing for the slowest qualifying lap so they can barge through the field on race day.
    The driver with most places gained wins the race.

    And yes Senna was way better than Schumacher.
    Besides if Senna was alive, he would have moved to Ferrari not Schumi, so what could and would happen nobody knows.

    Shumi built Ferrari from Scratch. What a joke.

    Sorry for the rant. but it is really annoying to read folks belittle a great champ’s achievements only because he makes it look easy.

    • ben69 (@ben69) said on 7th September 2011, 12:57

      Do you think if Senna moved to Ferrari he would have been as successful as Schumacher was?

      Only Senna would have gone to Ferrari. With Schumacher Brawn & Byrne came and that’s what changed Ferrari’s fortune!

      And let’s assume if Senna had gone to Ferrari he would have been drving there bad cars designed by Barnard & Schumacher probably would have gone to Williams and would have won the 1996,1997 championships.

      The word IF is very interesting!

    • MaroonJack (@maroonjack) said on 7th September 2011, 13:03

      If such criteria were applied to awarding Race points, we’d see drivers competing for the slowest qualifying lap so they can barge through the field on race day.

      Luckily, we don’t. Still, those drivers entertain us. Finishing 5th from 24th requires superb skills. Sure, Schumi didn’t built Ferrari from scratch, but he certainly helped them to recover and get back to the top.

      Was Senna better? Maybe, maybe not, we don’t have an objective measure to compare them. In my opinion Senna had a natural talent, a true gift, but Schumacher was making up for it with hard work and determination.

    • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 7th September 2011, 13:12

      No need for the ifs and buts at all, and no need to belittle Schumacher’s achievements which are great. Just don’t worry about Ichtyes that’s all. I’ve noticed that he feels the need to bash Senna in every second post he makes, even on subjects that aren’t remotely related to him. Each to his own I guess.

      • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th September 2011, 14:32

        Actually I was using a metaphor to discuss why the results of these polls tend to turn out a certain way. I also never bashed Senna, I simply said Schumacher was even better. If that’s considered belittling him than the problem doesn’t lie with me.

        I’ve noticed that he feels the need to bash Senna in every second post he makes, even on subjects that aren’t remotely related to him.

        Lol so you’re keeping tabs on everything I post are you? Oh, because I said Bruno drove like his uncle at the start? Well that’s maybe because Aytron was an aggressive driver, I thought that’s why so many people were fans of his? Like it or not that kind of driving has consequences, as Hamilton keeps finding out to his cost, especially nowadays with safe cars, drivers aren’t so easily frightened into backing out of a situation.

    • David-A (@david-a) said on 7th September 2011, 15:31

      And yes Senna was way better than Schumacher.
      Besides if Senna was alive, he would have moved to Ferrari not Schumi, so what could and would happen nobody knows.

      Sorry for the rant. but it is really annoying to read folks belittle a great champ’s achievements only because he makes it look easy.

      Bigger clash than Bruno and Jaime. Especially when you belittle Schumacher based only on what could or would have happened in your head.

  12. I believe that Vettel should have been voted DotW at least a couple of times this season. I think that we rather vote for the guy who surprised or entertained us the most, not really for the best driver.

    What is more, it is still often assumed that getting from the 20th or similar place on the starting grid to the 5th or similar place in the finish is an incredible achievement and worthy of DotW award. I am not sure this is really always the case, particularly with 2011 rules and the Pirelli tyres. We have seen many examples of such performance this year, which makes me think that it’s rather the rules that make it easier for any driver who starts in an inappropriately low position to drive through the field and finish in a good position.

    However, Iit is impossible

    • Sorry, here’s the final part of my comment:

      However, it is probably impossible to find the one and only correct way to measure drivers’ performances during a GP weekend. I think the judgements will always be more or less based on subjective considerations. So, in my opinion, the ‘Vote for your DotW’ feature on F1F is still a good one as it is a good base for interesting discussions.

    • David-A (@david-a) said on 7th September 2011, 18:05

      Sebastian should at least have won it in Spain, for overtaking, handling pressure and besting an on form Hamilton in a straight fight.

  13. Great roundup Ewa!

  14. If you have the best car of the field and you are faster than your team mate by 0.1 sec, you will probably win the GP and the reward will be 10 points in the chamiponship. But you won’t be Driver of the Weekend at F1F. Sorry. All 24 driver could live with that. :-) You have to have the right circumstances to be a hero.

  15. At the end of the season we should have a summary, totalling all the votes from the entire seasons ‘Driver of the Weekend’ polls to see who wins!

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.