Many drivers have weighed in on the subject of Michael Schumacher never having a really competitive teammate in Formula One. Karl Ludvigsen refutes that notion

A few weeks ago Autosport published an interview with Alain Prost in which the great Frenchman said that he would probably have won two more World Championships if he'd insisted in his team contract on having a teammate who was "just there to help me," not to race against him. This was, of course, a reference to Michael Schumacher. Wrongly, in my view, Autosport said that Prost's statement meant that he backed "Schumacher's controversial insistence on choosing slower teammates." Who said anything about "slower"?

Another who weighed in on the same subject was Jacques Villeneuve. "Everyone says he is better than Senna or Prost," he said, "but I disagree because they were up against one another in the same team whereas Michael doesn't have a teammate that he has to fight against. As a result he gets all the wins and Championships instead of half of them. People forget to look at that." Prost didn't forget, Jacques, but I see your point.

What I'm asking today is this: Who in the bloody blue blazes, Alain and Jacques, would you suggest that Ferrari hire to give Michael a teammate he has to fight against? Even if that were the policy of Ferrari? I suppose that Jacques is putting himself forward for the job. Eddie Irvine recently reminded us that in his view he's the best of all the rest of the racers. And he had his chance! Even if by contract he had to give way to Schumi he could have shown some serious speed on occasion.

Do these and other people really think that Barrichello is a bum? I for one do not. He is one very fast racing driver as he has shown on many occasions in recent seasons. Rubens is also a thinking racer, even if he does get saddled with some duff strategies as he did in the last two races. Did Ferrari do that on purpose? Certainly not! So who, of the current crop of drivers, would these critics suggest that Ferrari hire to give Michael some in-house competition, assuming that they had an unlimited budget (which they don't)? I can't think of one that would do a better job than Rubens.

The problem is that Schumi is one overwhelmingly quick and competent racing driver, perhaps the most complete talent that we have seen since Fangio. It was all on display at Suzuka. He dominated practice and qualifying. He headed the race from the start and only lost the lead during pit stops. And he did so on a circuit that is a real test of a driver's skill. This was Michael's fourth victory there. Senna, Berger, Hakkinen and Hill all scored double wins at Suzuka. With the honourable exception of Berger, it's a circuit of champions. Its sinuous switchbacks demand the ultimate in skill in exploiting the equipment, both in setup and racing. On this challenging track Michael showed once again that he is the dominant driver of the day.

Here too was another race in which Ferrari, McLaren and Williams hogged all the points that were on offer. No crumbs were left on the table to help the other teams improve their lot. Had there been, Benetton would have been the surprising beneficiaries. What a sensational improvement over the year! From laughing stock to contender in 17 races!

For an at-home race for Honda this was not the way they wanted to end the year. With BAR and Jordan locked at 17 points apiece Honda has no choice but to soldier on for another year with both teams and hope that one of them starts to show some pace. I frankly can't pick a winner here. In terms of experience and skill Jordan should be out in front, but the team always finds ways to fail. With an all-new driver cadre for 2002 their chances will not be improved.

What a great way to end the year! Not a great race, but some gritty drives - especially from Montoya - and a Championship-class performance by…well…by the champion!