CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › ruggedhawk20 › Posts

Posts by ruggedhawk20

1110 posts shown.

shadowmarlin22 said:Prost in '86—sure. I'd probably toss in 1982 or maybe 2008 too, but I can't get behind '91 or '95.

Regarding 1991—yeah, the Williams was a beast ahead of its time and all that, but the thing just kept breaking down. Between all those retirements, especially early in the season, they dropped so many points that Senna's class eventually allowed him to snatch it. After that, Mansell went on a tear, but the old pro managed to pull it off anyway.

As for 1995, that’s debatable; it feels like a classic 1a/1b scenario.

Bottom line: looking back over the last 60 years—say, since the 1960s—we have maybe two or three seasons where someone took the title without having the absolute best or even an equal car to the runner-up. But sure, go ahead and attack Lewis 🙏🙏, who has that 2008 run where the Ferrari was clearly the class of the field.

People talk, but Lewis had a more dominant car than, say, Senna or Niki Lauda... Fine, great, but whether he was dominant by one point or 100 points doesn't change the number of titles on his resume. If someone starts arguing Lewis is better than driver X just because he won by a larger margin, they're missing the point—he was driving a monster of a car.

Still, at the end of the day, the guy squeezes everything out of a dominant car, and this is the result we see....

Getting back to the race, there's one thing I don't think anyone has mentioned. Look, Russell is incredible, no question, but you could see a distinct difference—which is totally normal given the circumstances—where Russell would build a lead over Bottas and then lose it every few laps due to some tiny error or something similar. Hamilton's whole thing is that relentless lap-after-lap pace while managing tires; that's his superpower. If Lewis had been driving yesterday, I think the gap between the two Mercedes would have been significantly wider, which gives the pit crew much more breathing room for tire changes and almost certainly prevents mistakes. It's not Russell's fault, obviously, but that's the value of building a consistent advantage—you never know when you'll need that cushion for a double pit stop or whatever.

Did you actually watch '82 or are you just talking nonsense based on some stats you read?

1982 was easily the greatest Formula 1 season ever.

You had two distinct camps—the turbo beasts (Renault, Ferrari, Brabham-BMW) versus the naturally aspirated ones (McLaren-Cosworth, Williams-Cosworth, and Brabham-Cosworth)—each with their own massive pros and cons.

Looking at the whole season, those six cars were pretty much neck-and-neck, though the balance shifted constantly from one race to the next. One car would dominate one weekend, then another would take over the next, and so on.

People seriously deluding themselves thinking Gilles Villeneuve should've won the title. Based on his actual performance, he wouldn't have stood a chance. He was invisible in South Africa. In Brazil, he spun out under pressure from Nelson Piquet. He drove like a amateur in Long Beach. Then Pironi outsmarted him in Imola. And finally, he died at Zolder.

And honestly, Pironi wasn't all that either. He only snagged wins in Imola (a race most teams boycotted anyway) and Zandvoort.

In South Africa, Renault was untouchable. Alain Prost cruised to an easy win even after a tire blowout mid-race.

But by the very next race in Brazil, Prost was nowhere to be seen—the stats might say he won, but watch the actual race and you'll see the truth.

At Long Beach, the McLaren was the class of the field, and Niki Lauda was the best driver. Then in Zolder and Detroit, the McLaren was king again, with John Watson taking the wins and building a solid lead in the championship. But by Canada, they vanished, and Nelson Piquet dominated in the Brabham-BMW.

In the end, Rosberg took the title in the Williams.

And he did it right alongside legends like Prost, Piquet, Lauda, and Watson.

Just watch the full season. It’s worth it.
Kenneth Cruz67 said:Wait, wasn't I actually hinting at that very thing just yesterday? 🤔

I suppose you aren't really paying close enough attention.

My bad—totally missed that.

But honestly, you've built quite the reputation for talking nonsense, so I don't even bother reading your posts anymore.

Whatever.
It’s just COVID—nothing we don't already know about this whole mess.
BTW

In all this chaos, nobody’s even noticed that Lewis hasn't posted a single thing on socials for days now.

I mean, if we want Lewis to actually head toward that GOAT status... he just needs that sudden, unexpected passing to finally overtake his idol Senna and become immortal.
bluepuma9 said:Perez definitely deserves to stay in F1.
I wonder if he'd actually take a seat at Alpha Tauri if Kvyat moves on.

Seriously, why the heck do you have "Steinlager 2" on your avatar?
Gary Palmer8 said:Give me a break... Klien got unlapped by him in the Red Bull because Alonso was just playing it safe—he clearly didn't want to get into a real scrap with Kimi on the track.

So what?

He just proved he’s a smart driver who knows how to stay in the game and rack up points.

Maybe Max Verstappen could learn a thing or two from him—like, say, staying clear of Leclerc instead of forcing it at the finish line.
Amanda Kelly said:Fine by me.
I was just building on the criteria ruggedhawk20 laid out. He pointed out 1991, for instance, where Mansell and Patrese had 10 DNFs while Senna only had one. Back then, car unreliability was even more brutal than it is now.

Most of Mansell's DNFs in '91 were basically just him being sloppy.

In Canada he dropped out because his RPMs tanked—purely due to him losing focus. And in Suzuki? He just blew it.

So yeah, he threw away at least 16 points just by being classic Mansell.
Gary Palmer8 said:And hey—now people definitely won't be digging up anything else regarding poor Schumacher. The guy just had terrible luck, honestly.

As for Flavio, we all know how he intentionally sent little Nelson Piquet into that wall. Is that also considered an attempted murder, like you mentioned in your last post?

They found the evidence for Singapore. And Flavio is currently serving his ban.

I don't see the problem.

Actually—if they managed to prove the Singapore thing in just a single year, then they could've definitely caught the TC usage over those 26 years, assuming there was any truth to the whole story.
mellowtiger83 said:It stands to reason they were using it. Pure logic. Why would you develop something so secretive and specifically engineered if you weren't going to deploy it?

Simply having the capability implies usage. It is logical.

And people can say whatever they want about Ayrton Senna, but he certainly wasn't deaf, nor was he making baseless accusations against Benetton.

We are discussing a man who once pointed out a fundamental issue with the engine while Honda's mechanics insisted everything was perfect—until his sheer obsession forced them to tear it down, only for him to be proven right.

We are talking about a man who could tell if a barrier had shifted by a few centimeters while traveling at over 150 km/h. He was neither deaf nor blind.

There he is. Total flatlandist.
bluepuma9 said:There is evidence, plain and simple. The FIA found the software; they just couldn't prove they actually ran it. It’s a lot like what happened with Ferrari and their engine last year. 😁

And let's not forget when Benetton used that illegal fuel valve that allowed for lightning-fast refueling, which is why Michael Schumacher was able to jump ahead of Ayrton Senna in Brazil during the pit stop. That didn't come to light until much later in the season, after Jos Verstappen nearly caught fire.
Back then, Benetton was running a literal dream team of schemers: Flavio Briatore and Tom Walkinshaw. Match made in Heaven.

The FIA found the software, sure, but they never found proof it was actually being used.

Owning traction control software isn't against the rules—using it is. And they never found any proof of that.

Do you honestly think a massive, deep-pocketed organization like the FIA couldn't hire the best experts on the planet to find that evidence? Look, if the FIA never found a single shred of proof that the software was used—why are you still buying into this?

Sorry, but this whole Benetton TC story is straight-up flat-earther nonsense.
mellowtiger83 said:Are you implying the 1994 Benetton was the superior car? Because that year isn't even on your list.

Yeah. The Benetton was hands down the fastest car on the grid in '94.

Stop obsessing over the Constructors' Championship standings—look at the actual races.

You guys are all missing the point because you're stuck on the stats.

Every single race is just a few clicks away online, so for God's sake, actually watch the footage before you spend all day talking nonsense about it.
Gary Palmer8 said:If it looks like junk and smells like junk—well, there's a pretty good chance it actually is junk! — I learned that the hard way when my old Ford broke down in the middle of nowhere last summer. 😁

If there hasn't been a single shred of evidence found in 26 years—then there isn't any. Period.
bluepuma9 said:I don't have any proof. But honestly, looking back at how Schumacher acted during those years and the way Flavio Briatore operated... I can't rule out the possibility that things weren't exactly above board. It wasn't just Senna pointing fingers, either.

What does someone's attitude have to do with anything?

You could basically accuse anyone of financial fraud or, I don't know, being a predator just because they're annoying to deal with. We don't have a single shred of evidence against you—just like you don't have anything on Michael Schumacher.

It's the exact same flawed logic! You're just accusing someone because you don't like them.
shadowmarlin22 said:The mental gymnastics being pulled by two moderators is unreal—just constantly shifting the narrative just to find ways to discredit Lewis Hamilton. Seriously. 🙏🙏🙏

Are we going to start listing all the championships won by Senna, Schumacher, or Prost where they didn't actually have the best race car?

You already got the list on the last page.

Fine, here it is again

Alain Prost 1986
Senna 1991
Michael Schumacher 1995

Titles won in cars that weren't the absolute best.
bluepuma9 said:Unproven slander?
Those Benetton cars sat in various collectors' hands for years, and they eventually found hidden traction control software that could be triggered through a secret menu. And let's not forget, back in '94, Ayrton Senna was saying he could clearly hear them using TC coming out of the corners.

So you got actual proof that the software was ever even turned on?

Or is your "evidence" just the word of one single witness claiming he heard a certain sound.

That lone witness happened to be dealing with an unproven, unofficial assassination attempt fueled by revenge at the time, plus he was under official investigation for physically lunging at Eddie Irvine—facing a potential 14-month suspension.

He never even saw that suspension come down, though, because he ended up dying after a messy accident in a Formula 1 race car.
bluepuma9 said:So, we were looking back at those different championships from 2000 to 2004. Aside from 2003—where tires were basically the only thing making a difference—Ferrari had the best car on the grid, and they weren't just winning; sometimes they were a full second per lap faster than everyone else.
Even the Benetton back in '94 and '95 was an incredible machine. Looking back at '94, sure, maybe Williams had more raw pace, but their cars were way too twitchy and unpredictable to handle.

The race car stays legal until someone finds a loophole or a trick they didn't like, and then the whole team gets tossed out. It’s all fine until it isn't. ☕
As far as I can tell, Schumacher's race car wasn't disqualified or ruled illegal. So, if you ask me, it was just as legal as anything Mercedes is running today.

Maybe do a little more homework here. Benetton actually got disqualified a few times back when Schumi was driving because the race car just wasn't up to code with the regulations.

Honestly, all this talk about him being the G.O.A.T. is just pure fairy tale nonsense. A real G.O.A.T. wouldn't have blown it in a single race or qualifying session, let alone struggled against the kind of "competition" he had in Nico Rosberg.
It’s all just a facade. If things had gone differently, we wouldn't even be talking about PP's wins over Bottas and Rosberg. They claim those two are equals, right? Total parity. But then you look at the media coverage—the team principal keeps spinning stories about how Bottas is just the "perfect wingman." Meanwhile, James is constantly chirping in his ear, telling him to back off at Turn 12 so the Luxury driver can sweep past without losing time or shredding his tires. It's a setup. And yet, they still have the nerve to call them equals. 😍

With Nico Rosberg, there was still enough smoke and mirrors to hide what was actually happening. With Valtteri Bottas, there’s no mystery at all—he’s been very loud and very public about being the No. 2 driver. At the end of the day, it’s pretty obvious he doesn't have the talent to be in that race car on his own merits; he was brought in specifically to play the supporting role. ☕

It’s honestly kind of ridiculous. You look at the stats and see that Rosberg and Bottas have twice as many poles as multi-time champions like Fernando Alonso, yet those two are pretty much just mid-tier talents in the Formula 1 league. Sure, Rosberg is clearly the better driver of the two, but he isn't exactly operating on a different planet.
Look at the numbers. Fernando Alonso has only managed 22 wins in his long career, while Bottas & Rosberg have racked up 45. It just puts things in perspective. 🤦 And their win count is exactly the same...

Look, Rosberg is a hell of a driver. Why does Hamilton need to have some perfect, 100% win record against every single person on the grid just for us to call him the G.O.A.T.? That’s just not realistic. It's impossible.
In this modern era of Formula 1, none of the world champions have ever had teammates as solid as Lewis Hamilton. The guy’s been winning since his karting days, and he hasn't stopped since.

Schumacher was disqualified at the 1994 British Grand Prix because he overtook during the formation lap. So, nothing to do with the race car.

After that, he was disqualified at the Belgian Grand Prix because of a plank on the floor that was thinner than allowed. That's a car issue. But, he was disqualified. He walked away with exactly zero points with that car.

At the Italian Grand Prix and the Portuguese Grand Prix, he was banned from racing due to his behavior at the British Grand Prix where he ignored the black flag. So, again, absolutely nothing to do with the car.

I'm telling you, he drove an illegal race car only once. At the Belgian Grand Prix. And he got disqualified for it. So, he scored exactly zero points with that car.

Everything else is just nonsense and straight-up unproven slander.
Kenneth Cruz67 said:Personally, I felt they were both pretty much neck and neck that year, though I suppose Lewis was certainly more exciting to watch, even if he had a bit less luck and dealt with more than his fair share of setbacks involving Felipe Massa, whereas Button was... well, Button, being himself as always, so I guess there's still a tiny edge to Lewis for me.😁

"Exciting" isn't exactly how you rank drivers.

Felipe Massa, Kevin Magnussen, that guy from Venezuela, etc.—they're all "exciting" drivers too.
stormybadger8 said:I can't believe I actually 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I put my money on a Perez win combined with a DNF Max and Leclerc 😍

Well then—go invite the President over for a BBQ.

That'd be about right.
mellowtiger83 said:It is truly quite embarrassing how they have to go to such lengths just to justify Russell's performance alongside Lewis Hamilton, haha.

A shame it didn't last another two laps so he could overtake Bottas once more.🙂

If they let George Russell win, their whole seven-title hype train just derails completely.

They built this massive propaganda machine around a fake GOAT, and now it's all falling apart.

Unless someone shuts up. Then Toto will pull some strings through Flavio

Sadly for Toto, Flavio's got better connections.
ruggedhawk20 said:Honestly, anyone stepping in should be looking at a Top 10 finish—it's a fair expectation. But let's be real, the track is gonna be a complete mystery to everyone, so last weekend's data basically means nothing.

Way to go, Mr. President. Seriously. Just brilliant.