Ross Brawn: 'There's nothing above Michael Schumacher'

This article can be found in our Collector Michael Schumacher. 132 pages retracing the career of the seven-time World Champion Formula 1, available in our online store in format paper ou PRESENCE.

When did you first hear about Michael?

It was before Benetton. I was working with Tom Walkinshaw for Jaguar in Sport-Prototypes in the 1980s and we came across Michael who was a member of the team Mercedes, our main opponent. He was already quite exceptional and it was easy to notice him. There were two or three drivers per car, and he was regularly the fastest. There were drivers like Jochen Mass who had enormous experience including in F1, other hopes like Karl Wendlinger. Michael stood out. When, with Tom, we found ourselves at Benetton, we naturally became interested in him.

Is the Michael of the Benetton years a draft of the Michael who would become the enormous champion that we know?

The foundations were there, but you can't rely on them alone. It also takes talent, and his was enormous. The history of Formula 1 is full of drivers with great talent... but who don't know how to put it into practice. Clearly, Michael knew that. He also benefited from exceptional physical condition, enormous power of concentration, and extraordinary commitment. He had all the required attributes. He did not have much experience in car since he had joined the ranks of Group C after the F3, and he needed to learn, to gain experience, but he had this intelligence which allowed him to skip the steps.

You find him again in 1996. After a year in Red, has he already changed?

He was the same. He had spent a little over four years at Benetton, won two world titles (in 1994 and 1995. Ed.) and needed a new challenge. At that time, there was no one bigger than Ferrari. He knew it would be extremely difficult, but he didn't care. It was pure Michael. He had this conviction that if you invest as much as possible, if you work hard, success will always come in the end. He had this certainty that nothing is impossible if you give yourself the means.

Would you have accepted Jean Todt's offer to join Ferrari if Michael had not been there?

To be honest, I had the opportunity to join Ferrari at the same time as Michael at the end of 1995. At that time, John Barnard was the technical director and I said to myself that Michael, without necessarily wanting to admit it, had perhaps wanted to try something completely new, with new people, to see how it could work. When it became clear after a few months that he thought the Scuderia needed reinforcement, I was contacted again around May. Coming back to the question, no, joining Ferrari when Michael left was never my intention. We had long conversations during which he explained this new challenge to me, how he approached it, what he expected from it. I could sense his deep commitment, but I wanted to remain loyal to Benetton and fulfill my own commitments. When I renegotiated my contract with Benetton at the end of 1995, I was only interested in the direction the team was going to take. Flavio (Briatore who was director of Benetton. Ed.) was also convinced that my vision was the one to follow, except that it proved very difficult to implement. Over the months, frustration began to get to me. It probably also started to get to Michael at Maranello. He knew the inner workings of Benetton, the way the team handled things. The way Ferrari operated did not suit him. At the same time, I was contacted by Willi Weber (former manager of Michael Schumacher. Ed.), then I had a meeting with Jean Todt in Monaco. The process was underway.

There has been a lot of talk about the “dream team” that you formed with Michael, Rory Byrne and Jean Todt. What was Michael’s place in this quartet? Who set the tempo: you, him, Jean, Rory?

We weren't just four... Stefano Domenicali (then team manager. Editor's note) was there, Nigel Stepney (technical manager of the racing and testing teams. Editor’s note) was there, and others too. The strength of this group is that we all had the same mentality. When we had a problem, we resolved it as a family. It would never have occurred to anyone to criticize in public or resolve problems through the press. I say this because at the time the Scuderia was very influenced by the media. The group was led by six managers who never sat around a table to discuss how to handle problems. We never discussed it, because it was just a matter of respect. There was this collective awareness that we had to wash our dirty laundry as a family. Michael was obviously an important link, and he never – or really very rarely – criticized the team. He had perfect control over his emotions. Because there was this mutual respect, each person’s assessments had even more value. They were all the more listened to and taken into consideration. Everyone had in mind that we needed to support each other, and no one wanted to get the credit for success alone. If the phrase “dream team” has one meaning, this is it.

So what was Michael’s strength?

Let's start with the top speed. My qualities as a strategist were often praised at the time, but I must admit that Michael's speed made decisions very easy. Today, everyone is talking about Lewis and his “Hammer Time”. At the time, we had our “Schumi Time” as he was able to deliver the performance when needed. The typical example is the 1998 Hungarian Grand Prix where he managed to complete 18 qualifying laps to win. When you have this strength in a team, when you can say to the driver “ This is the time to perform! », everything becomes possible. Whenever we asked him about his effort now, he always responded, “ Yes I understood ! ". When you know you can count on a driver who can do that, you know you have a huge advantage. When a driver has that speed, that’s the foundation. Then there's everything else: concentration, attention to detail, involvement, the ability to motivate the team... He had all of that, and physical condition to boot! Nowadays, all pilots have a high level of physical preparation, but at that time, this was not the case. We had drivers fainting out of the car or on the podiums while Michael was jumping like a kid. From a physical point of view, he created new standards.

Was being his teammate both the best and worst thing that could happen to a driver?

It was difficult for them. Consciously, we never had a No. 1 driver; Subconsciously, we always knew that when we had 50/50 decisions to make, they were always in Michael's favor, because we knew he was going to deliver. You can't blame a team for that. They were rarely easy decisions because they were very close... I always told Eddie (Irvine), Rubens (Barrichello) and Felipe (Massa) that the day they were faster than Michael Schumacher, that they would become a better driver than Michael Schumacher, the 50/50 decision would be in their favor, but that never happened. We gave Michael's teammates the same equipment and the same opportunities, but fighting Schumi every race weekend took a lot of energy. It's like fighting today Lewis Hamilton ou Max Verstappen every weekend. There is no advantage in terms of car. They couldn't be Michael, and these were times of great frustration for these guys. Nevertheless, they all did a very good job. Eddie almost gave up his personal ambitions to become an exceptional second. Rubens was definitely the most frustrated, because he was so close to Michael so many times. As for Felipe, it was easier, because he was the apprentice. It was easier for him to accept this role.

Within the Scuderia, was he more respected than loved?

He was respected of course, but above all loved. Much loved, even! He had very close relationships with many people within the team. He played football on Thursday evenings, he knew all the mechanics by name, nickname. He sent presents on birthdays, births, and important moments in life. We had big parties with the team. Michael loved celebrations! He was loved by the guys and the fans. A love that endures.

So is the private Michael very different from the public persona?

He was not a public man. He was by necessity, but did his best to preserve his privacy. I know when I am at work, performing and when I am not. I don't mix, and Michael did the same. He knew when he had responsibilities to assume towards his team or F1, in the car but also outside for commercial or marketing operations. He respected that, and worked hard too. Otherwise, he only aspired to a calm and retired life. He didn't go to red carpets, didn't go to fashion shows, wasn't attracted to anything that sparkled, all of that wasn't his world. His life was his family, the horses, the different things he did with Corinna. He was just a normal guy in an environment that was no longer normal because of his immense popularity. Obviously, it wasn't easy, but he managed it. Often, at the end of a race, he would disappear after the debriefing and we would not hear from him again until the next Grand Prix. We could of course contact him if necessary, but we did not have the necessity. He preserved his private life, but at the same time, he liked to socialize. He came to the big events of my life, and I was to his. He had a happy life outside the circuits.

What did you like most about him?

I loved human beings first. He had his moods like I have mine, but he was always completely honest. He was someone I believed in and I could have put my life in his hands. He never let us down. We didn't agree all the time, but he was always completely open and transparent. He was just a good person.

Did he change Ferrari more than Ferrari changed him?

He was part of a process that changed Ferrari. When he joined Ferrari in 1996, the situation was rather precarious after several difficult years. Michael was initially a crucial element in stabilizing the Scuderia. He opposed a whole bunch of planned changes, arguing that everyone was there to build a stable, not to tear it apart. His influence was essential during the first difficult years. We lost two championships and it was painful. The Scuderia was indebted to him at the time for his newfound serenity. A newfound desire to take on big challenges, to do great things. It would have been much more difficult and it would have taken much longer without his ability to gather. We must also not forget that he came from a structure like Benetton which was very well organized when he arrived at Ferrari. The Scuderia was at the time a very complex machine to run with part of the organization in Italy and the other in England. Communication was not good, there were different opinions regarding the car, etc. He understood that there was no structure to the organization, and he had the courage to say that the way of operating was not the right way. He pushed for the model to be closer to what he had experienced with Sauber-Mercedes in Sport-Prototypes and Benetton in F1. He has driven for efficiency.

At the end of the 2006 season, did he end his career with regret?

I think he was just tired of what he was doing. I had decided for my part that a decade in Maranello was enough. I didn't know what I wanted to do next, but I knew I wanted to leave Ferrari at the top. We had a few difficult years with the tires, but we overcame the problem. When he announced his departure at the end of 2006, he had not breathed since his young years in karting. He just wanted to take a break. I can understand that and, if he wanted to stop, it was the right time, because Jean (Todt. Editor's note) was called to other functions within Ferrari (delegated administrator. Editor’s note) and was going to be replaced by Stefano Domenicali, and I was leaving for other horizons. Everything converged.

Before Ferrari, had you ever experienced such a professional symbiosis, and will you experience it after?

The answer is no in both cases! Such a meeting of people of this standard, with a driver as exceptional as Michael, only happens very rarely. No more than once a decade. I worked with Lewis (Hamilton. Editor’s note) who is another incredibly fast and talented driver, but with a completely different approach. An assumed and sought-after notoriety, a lifestyle on the “fast line” as opposed to the tranquility sought by Michael. But deep down there was the same commitment, talent and desire. Just the approach was different. For me, having contributed to winning each of his seven world titles was just exceptional. There is nothing above Michael.

ALSO READ > Sabine Kehm: “Michael Schumacher changed the definition of a Formula 1 driver”