Prost or Senna?

[BootsOntheSide]

I don't think Prost does come out ahead on statistics - not once you factor in the lost years of Senna's career. Ayrton could still have won 1994 from 30 points behind consider Michael's subsequent race bans, had at least an equal car to the Benetton for 1995 and then, perhaps, 2 years in domiannt machinery after that. Certainly he would have bettered Prost's tally of 51 victories, and in less than 199 races. When you remember how many races Senna had in unreliable and/or uncompetitive machinery, that's quite something.

[NO1SPECIAL]

Do you have to?

[Grandprix]

I would say Prost just but there really isn't much between them at all. Senna was just lightning quick and was a personality, which lended himself to being more popular. Senna's ability to get the most out of a car was legendary.

I could easily talk myself into saying Senna but I'm going to stick with Prost.

[maltafan]

We all know they both were top 10 drivers ever, however, one has to keep in mind that Prost had his time to finish his career and Senna didn't. When Senna was with Williams, the car was good and I am sure that he would have won more, so I do not think that statistics would be such a good measure.

Personally I prefer the passion that Senna showed. Racing was his life.

[BSchneiderFan]

I'd go for Prost (but would rate Clark more highly than either of them).

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Yeah but statistics say Schuey is the best driver ever and i quite confident that ain't right! Well i certainly don't think he is faster than Senna was or Gilles?

There are only two ways of assessing this. Statistics or personal preference. What might have happened or would have happened is irrelevant, because it didn't happen. Statistically Prost was better, but most people's preference would be Senna because he was more entertaining.

Its a similar situation with Gilles Villeneuve. Like Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody, he always ends up in the top sections of 'the greatest F1 drivers of all time' when he wasn't. The facts bear that out. However, in terms of entertainment and excitement he was untouchable.

[Before I get drowned in abuse here, I myself am a huge Gilles fan and would vote him in the top 5 of my own favourites too, but I wouldn't put Queen at the top of my pop all time greats :-) ]

[BootsOntheSide]

I wish people wouldn't say Prost is ahead on statistics - that's a very simplistic view when you see that Senna was in the best car when he died, and had at least 2 years of that best car ahead of him. Factor than in, and Senna would have matched or overtaken Prost on everything except fastest laps.

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

Senna was in the best car when he died,

Was he? I thought the Williams was an extremely difficult car to drive at the time, and Senna wrung more out of it in qualifying than anyone was entitled to expect. I agree it was about to become the best, once Williams engineers and Damon's feedback dialled it in but I don't see that you can refer to 'what ifs', because you can apply that to almost any driver. 'What if' Senna had not subjected his competitors, particularly Prost, to his dubious on track driving ethics (which he did throughout his career), would he have achieved as much? He was undoubtedly a great driver, but, in my eyes at least, that greatness will be forever tarnished by this. Since that aspect of his driving has left such an adverse impression on me, it would probably be unfair of me to enter any direct debate about which of these two great drivers was better!

[Mattracer]

In the rain, qualifying, when the car was not "right"- Senna

Stats- Prost win more races and 4 WDCs to 3. Senna appelas more to some bacuse he was astonishingly fast all the time, almost ridiculously brave and totally committed and Prost was calculating, smooth, controlled and deceptive in his art.

Prost had an enormous amount of respect for Senna- look at the official DVD. Senna had an enormous respect for Prost. Neither was as great as they were without the other. Could there be any greater measure of a driver's worth than the level of respect given from their main adversaries? For me Senna was the greatest ever. That's just me though.

[Adam43]

They were both legends on their own, but neither of them would have been half the driver without the other.

[Nintendo]

Originally Posted by davyboy

Nintendo, noticed you changed your address to "Mondello Heights"... have Tallaght and Clondalkin now spread past Naas :-)

Its a nice way of saying i live in a makeshift hut beihnd the advertising signs on the circuit. I used to be "The home Of Jordan", but they're dead. I'm probably gonna change it again to something like Cillit Bang Boulevard.

[Nintendo]

no, even further infact, cos i live in sandyford.

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by Mattracer

Prost had an enormous amount of respect for Senna- look at the official DVD. Senna had an enormous respect for Prost.

Mmmm! Hindsight, rose tinted glasses? Respect is a funny word in the way it can be applied, but by any definition this wasn't apparent between the end of 1988 and end of 1993, either by word or deed. The reconciliation which took place at the end of 93 when Prost retired and again at that fatal race at Imola in 94 when Senna said he missed Prost's presence on the grid was unlikely to have been maintained if they had continued racing against each other.

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

They were both legends on their own, but neither of them would have been half the driver without the other.

Agree with the first part, Adam, but the second is over egging it a bit isn't? I'm not even sure it's true since it could be argued that they also brought the worst out of each other as well as the best. In fact, if they did bring out the best in each other and had so much respect, why was the racing between them, particularly by Senna, not a whole lot cleaner?

[Nintendo]

Becuase evn though they were two completely different animals, they shared one common goal: To beat evryone no matter what.

[John Turner]

Not true. I don't believe that was Prost's philosophy at all. He drew a line; Senna, didn't.

[Adam43]

I disagree, although only on a definition point. Senna's line was just in a different place.

Having said that Prost did say after that pass at the Portuguese GP that "if he want the title that much he can have it".

[Nintendo]

I agree with that. senna's line was far further away than prosts, but it was there. Senna was a risktaker, Prost was a strategist. Two absolute legends

[Bononi]

...and then came Schumacher.


...and then came Alonso.

to be continued.

[djinvicta]

Senna just had the "no fear" factor, rain or shine, that makes a multiple champion; he was also a good business man....

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by djinvicta

Senna just had the "no fear" factor, rain or shine, that makes a multiple champion; he was also a good business man....

You should read "A semente da Vitória" ("The seed of Victory") by Nuno Cobra. Cobra was Senna's personal trainer - in a time that there were no such thing - and tell how Senna was before, and how he became the famous Senna we all know.

Cobra was Hakkinen's trainer too and other famous athletes.

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

Senna's line was just in a different place.

Nowhere where anyone could identify it and well beyond where it should have been!

[davyboy]

Its interesting that although each of them were kings of karting in their era, neither won a world championship. Prost missed it in 1975 when he was taken out. Senna was more determined and he would go back at it again and again until an F1 team contractually put a stop to it. Until his death, Senna admitted that missing out on the world karting crown was one of his greatest regrets.

[krt917]

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

I would overall go for Senna as the better driver though, simply because he was faster, and would have bettered all Prost's major stats if he'd had those 2 years at Williams. Some of Ayrton's drives in the 1993 McLaren in the wet against Prost's domiannt Williams suggest that Mr. V might be right.

I think, though, that you have to remember that Prost was almost certainly passed his best by then, whereas many believe Senna was reaching his peak in 1993.

Originally Posted by chunterer

To the point...i'll go for Senna - When they both had Mclaren's not much in it? but in 1990 Prost largely had the better car but Senna beat him (leaving out Suzuka)

As has already been said, I'm not convinced the Ferrari was the better package - it depended on the circuit. The Honda in the McLaren also often made it difficult to pass, even when the Ferrari was quicker over a lap.

And I believe that Prost was a major factor in helping Ferrari make that extra step to challenge McLaren, and I don't mean just by his driving.

Originally Posted by climb

Without pairing with Prost those years at Macs, I'm not sure Senna would have matured the way he did, with the consequent achievements.

Good point. I have often wondered what Senna would have been like without Prost. He would have won more, but would ha have been as complete a driver?

Originally Posted by davyboy

[Before I get drowned in abuse here, I myself am a huge Gilles fan and would vote him in the top 5 of my own favourites too, but I wouldn't put Queen at the top of my pop all time greats :-) ]

Well, you're just wrong about Queen!

Originally Posted by davyboy

Prost missed it in 1975 when he was taken out.

He must have been used to it by 1990 then!

Overall, I think Senna was faster, but I'd go with Prost as better. Senna's pace was undeniable - 65 poles, though I've always found it interesting that Prost scored more than twice as many fastest laps, showing:
1. He was very quick;
2. He would often get the car right for the race.
For me, Senna was also just a bit too aggressive with his rivals (and backmarkers - he lost a couple of races he shouldn'thave due to silly incidents in traffic).

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by krt917

For me, Senna was also just a bit too aggressive with his rivals (and backmarkers - he lost a couple of races he shouldn'thave due to silly incidents in traffic).

He probably gained a couple because of it too!

[ravaglia]

Just wonder why everyone always talking how hard that Senna race against Prost in 93 (and how he beat Prost in Donington), but nobody mention how Prost beat Senna in 89?