But who did he have as competition? He had the best car in a team that was prepeared to use team orders (when legal) to help and with respect to drivers of the time, perhaps only Häkkinen was ever better.
I’ve always considered that to be a common anti-Schumacher argument, which isn’t valid anyway.
How is it possible that Schumacher had no competition in the 16 years he was in the sport? How can you prove Brabham, G.Hill, Surtees, Stewart and Rindt were better than Hill, Hakkinen, Raikkonen, and Alonso?
Here’s the truth: There were a lot of great drivers in Schumachers era who never reached full potential, that was because unlike any other driver, Schumacher was so good, he made his solid competition seem useless.
About the fastest car, out of the 7 world titles Schumacher won, in how many did he really have the fastest car? In 2002 and 2004, I can admit. But what about the rest? In 1994-95 Williams were every bit as good if not better than Benetton. I highly doubt Ferrari were ahead of either Williams or Mclaren in 2001, and in 2003 Schumacher often had the third or fourth (!) best car, and he still won the title. Heck, you could argue that in 2002 Williams wereon par with Ferrari, in qualifying at least.
What about 1997 or 1998? Schumacher challenged for the title in a car that was some 1 second slower than the Williams or Mclaren respectivily.
There’s no way the “best car” or “no competition” excuses are going to work on Schumacher, if you look deeper.